mmm$ 


0Sh 


&&M^ 


:/!• 


y-< 


«»«^^S^ 


&7**A 


l5  ^T^^SlA? 


Digitized  by  the  Internet  Archive 
in  2010  with  funding  from 
Duke  University  Libraries 


http://www.archive.org/details/glimpsesoffuturOOcrol 


GLIMPSES  OF    THE 
FUTURE 

SUGGESTIONS  AS  TO  THE   DRIFT  OF   THINGS 


DAVID    GOODMAN    CROLY 


(to  be  read  now  and  judged  in  the  year  2000) 


NEW  YORK  &  LONDON 

G.  P.  PUTNAM'S    SONS 

&|je  Jinixktrbocfcer  |)res3 

1888 


COPYRIGHT   I?Y 

DAVID  GOODMAN   CROLY 

1888 


Press  of 

G.  P.  Putnam's  Sons 

New  York 


THIS    WORK 

is 

DEDICATED  TO 

CLINTON   W.  SWEET 

MY   BEST  AND    KINDEST  FRIEND,   WHO   FIRST 
SUGGESTED    ITS   COMPILATION 


CONTENTS. 


PAGE 

Introduction i 

An  Initial  Talk 3 

Our  Political  Future 7 

Our  Political  Future — Continued 18 

Our  Coming  Foreign  Policy 32 

Possibilities  in  the  Way  of  Party  Organizations    .        .  38 

Religious  Changes  of  the  Future 43 

The  Relation  of  the  Sexes         .  ' 48 

Improving  the  Race 55 

The  Secret  of  the  Jewish  Race 62 

A  Discursive  Chapter 69 

Is  a  Universal  Language  Possible? 79 

The  Prospect  for  Architecture 87 

Conceits  about  the  Currency 93 

Trusts,  Corporations,  and  Government  Work        .         .  99 

What  will  Become  of  the  Middle  Classes?     .         .         .  105 

Anent  the  Labor  Question no 

As  to  Irrigation 116 

Journalism  as  it  is  and  will  be 122 

A  Body  of  Censors  Proposed 129 

The  Fate  of  the  Negro 133 

The  Tendencies  of  Education 139 

The  Destiny  of  New  York  City 144 

What  Science  has  in  Store  for  us 151 

Travelling  through  the  Air 156 

The  Utilization  of  Dreams 161 

Some  Odd  Conceits 167 

A  Word  with  a  Critic 174 


GLIMPSES  OF  THE  FUTURE. 


INTRODUCTION. 


The  author  of  this  work  was  fortunate  enough  to 
predict  in  187 1  the  panic  of  1873,  designating  the 
railroad  corporation  which  would  first  come  to  grief  and 
the  banking  house  which  would  probably  be  the  first  to 
suspend  payment.  He  was  also  rather  lucky  in  guessing 
the  probable  result  of  elections.  This  ability  to  forecast 
the  future  in  a  certain  way  was  of  use  to  him  when  man- 
aging a  leading  daily  paper  in  New  York.  When  ill- 
health  forced  him  to  give  up  daily  journalism,  his  friend, 
Clinton  W.  Sweet,  invited  him  to  do  some  editorial  writ- 
ing on  the  Record  and  Guide.  A  "  Prophetic  Depart- 
ment "  was  commenced,  in  which  an  attempt  was  made 
to  forecast  the  future  of  business  and  politics.  As  it 
would  not  do  to  commit  either  the  writer  or  the  paper  to 
authoritative  statements,  subjects  were  treated  in  a  rather 
off-hand  manner  by  a  "  Sir  Oracle,"  the  name,  of  course, 
implying  that  the  writer  was  probably  a  bumptious  sort 
of  person,  who  was  as  likely  to  be  wrong  as  right.  The 
department  proved  attractive  to  the  readers  of  the  Record 
and  Guide,  and  the  predictions  were  often  fortunate.  In- 
deed so  much  interest  was  thus  created  that  the  publisher 
was  frequently  asked  :  Would  it  not  be  possible  to  print  in 


2  GLIMPSES  OF  THE  FUTURE. 

some  permanent  form  such  of  the  vaticinations  of  "  Sir 
Oracle  "  as  related  to  the  remote  future,  or  to  the  tendency 
and  drift  of  things  ?  Of  course  much  of  the  matter  in  the 
"  Prophetic  Department  "  was  on  current  themes  and  had 
no  permanent  interest.  In  the  following  pages  there  is 
considerable  new  matter.  Practically,  the  conversations 
have  been  re-written,  and  those  which  have  been  retained 
have  been  edited  and  grouped  under  appropriate  heads. 
It  is  "  Sir  Oracle  "  who  still  answers  the  questions,  but 
had  the  work  been  written  de  novo  that  name  would  not 
have  been  used,  as  it  suggests  a  flippancy  and  self-suffi- 
ciency hardly  befitting  the  scope  of  the  subjects  dis- 
cussed. 

D.  G.  C. 


AN  INITIAL  TALK. 


Reader. — So  you  propose  to  tell  us  something  about  the 
future  ?  Is  that  practicable  ?  Would  it  be  desirable  that 
we  should  know  beforehand  what  is  to  take  place  in  the 
world  we  live  in  ?  I  can  see  that  there  would  be  a  mighty 
change  in  our  lives  and  in  the  history  of  the  world  if  our 
"  fore  sight  "  was  equal  to  our  "  hind  sight."  But  is  not 
nature  wise  in  hiding  from  us  the  secrets  of  the  days 
to  come  ? 

Author. — I  have  no  notion  of  being  able  to  tell  what  the 
future  has  in  store  for  us.  The  best  we  can  do  is  to  indi- 
cate the  drift  of  things.  Possibilities,  and  not  certainties, 
are  all  we  can  hope  for  in  speculating  upon  to-morrow  and 
the  day  after.  Unconsciously  we  do  order  our  lives  upon 
some  theory  of  the  future.  We  educate  our  children  so 
they  shall  pursue  a  certain  career  either  in  business  or  in 
the  professions.  Every  merchant  and  manufacturer  buys 
goods  or  makes  them,  upon  some  theory  as  to  their  value 
when  the  time  to  dispose  of  them  comes.  Sagacity  in 
business  means  a  certain  kind  of  prevision.  It  has 
seemed  to  me  that  this  faculty  of  looking  ahead  has 
not  been  cultivated  as  it  should  have  been,  and  this 
book  has  been  written  with  a  view  to  turning  men's 
thoughts  from  dwelling  so  much  on  the  past  and  pres- 
ent, and  inducing  them  to  think  out  what  is  likely  to 
occur  hereafter. 

3 


4  GLIMPSES  OF  THE  FUTURE. 

Reader. — But  surely  there  can  be  no  certainty  in  such 
speculations.  The  average  man  has  not  patience  enough 
for  such  investigations,  and  the  clever,  ingenious,  imagi- 
native man  would  most  certainly  become  the  victim  of 
his  own  theories  and  illusions.  I  cannot  see  any  data 
which  would  make  prophecy  reasonable,  and  of  course 
you  do  not  claim  inspiration. 

Author. — I  claim  to  be  guided  only  by  experience  and 
ordinary  common-sense.  I  shall  make  very  grave,  and 
what  will  seem  to  my  readers  twenty  years  from  now, 
unaccountable  mistakes,  but  I  hope  to  call  into  existence 
a  class  of  thinkers  and  writers,  who  will  do  far  better 
than  I  with  my  present  environment  can  hope  to  do. 
They  should  profit  by  my  blunders.  The  test  of  science 
is  said  to  be  prevision.  The  astronomer  can  tell  to  a 
second  the  beginning  of  an  eclipse  a  thousand  years 
ahead.  The  chemist  makes  no  mistakes  ;  when  he  puts 
together  certain  atoms  of  matter,  he  knows  and  announces 
beforehand  what  the  result  will  be.  It  may  be  air  or 
water  or  an  explosive,  but  he  is  never  at  fault.  Of  course 
there  can  be  no  such  certainty  in  predicting  social  phe- 
nomena, for  the  factors  are  so  complex  that  unexpected 
results  are  sure  to  make  their  appearance.  Nevertheless 
there  are  certain  tendencies  in  history,  which  may  give 
us  some  clew  to  the  hereafter.  It  is  this  ground  I  propose 
to  occupy.  I  expect  to  be  at  fault  in  many  important 
matters  ;  but  if  I  can  induce  men  to  think  of  conse- 
quences I  shall  have  done  what  maybe  a  useful  work. 

Reader. — What  do  you  consider  the  most  dangerous 
pit-falls  likely  to  beset  a  social  prophet? 

Author. — The  most  serious  difficulty  in  speculating  as 
to  the  future  is  the  liability  to  imagine  Utopias.  From 
the  " Republic"   of  Plato  down  to  Edward    Bellamy's 


AN  INITIAL  TALK.  5 

"  Looking  Backward,"  all  writers  have  indulged  their 
fancy  for  ideal  social  states.  We  all  know  that  the  world 
might  be  a  great  deal  better  than  it  is  ;  and  most  of  us 
have  theories  as  to  how  the  affairs  of  men  could  be  bet- 
ter managed  than  they  are,  and  insensibly  we  portray  an 
imaginary  state  of  things,  instead  of  confining  ourselves 
to  the  data  afforded  by  the  past  experience  of  the  race. 
Although  the  mass  of  mankind  has  made  advances  over 
the  past,  still,  history  shows  that  there  has  been  retro- 
gression as  well  as  progression.  The  races  that  were  once 
dominant,  such  as  the  Egyptians,  Grecians,  and  Romans, 
have  fallen  to  the  rear,  while  the  barbarians  of  their  times 
have  come  to  the  front.  One  word  of  caution.  This 
conversation  would  seem  to  imply  that  my  ambition  was 
to  give  a  general  philosophy  of  history  ;  my  aim  is  far 
more  modest.  I  propose  simply  to  take  up  such  matters 
as  are  of  everyday  importance,  and  try  to  think  out  the 
future  with  regard  to  them.  This  will  involve  such 
questions  as  marriage,  wealth  and  poverty,  the  tenden- 
cies of  business,  modern  finance,  the  good  and  evil  in  our 
American  institutions,  as  well  as  some  guesses  as  to  the 
future  history  of  Europe.  I  should  like,  also,  to  give 
you  another  warning  before  I  begin  scraping  my  little 
hole  through  the  fence  which  separates  us  from  the  future. 
You  will  find  but  small  unity  of  construction  either  in  the 
book  as  a  whole  or  in  each  separate  conversation.  And 
this  discursiveness  is  a  necessary  accompaniment  to  a 
work  designed  as  this  is.  I  have  not  intended  to  be  in 
any  way  exhaustive.  I  only  wish  to  offer  a  few  sugges- 
tions on  the  future  aspect  of  current  topics  ;  and  if  you 
are  not  at  any  time  able  to  see  the  connection  between 
one  of  my  suggestions  and  another,  I  can  only  give  you 
as  an  excuse  for  my  incoherency  the  old  one  that  what 


O  GLIMPSES  OF  THE  FUTURE. 

is  intended  to  create  thought  should  never  exhaust  it. 
Emerson  was  once  asked  what  connection  there  was  be- 
tween two  parts  of  one  of  his  discourses.  "  None,  friend," 
he  answered,  "  except  in  the  mind  of  God."  I  am  afraid 
that  in  reading  the  following  you  will  have  to  depend 
much  on  the  mind  of  God.  As  I  have  said,  the  separate 
pieces  have  no  unity  of  construction  ;  only  unity  of  de- 
sign. Like  a  lot  of  logs,  they  all  float  down  stream  ;  but 
often  in  so  doing  they  will  either  clash  together,  or  swing 
wide  apart.  In  putting  this  book  together,  I  am,  I  think, 
occupying  new  ground,  and  in  a  wilderness  a  few  log 
cabins,  tumble-down  though  they  be,  are  pretty  nearly 
as  useful  as  a  Queen  Anne  cottage,  with  all  the  "  modern 
improvements."  I  offer  you  my  huts.  Seek  shelter 
under  them,  if  you  will. 


OUR  POLITICAL  FUTURE. 


Statesman. — As  our  country  has  just  about  reached  its 
hundredth  year,  it  strikes  me  that  the  time  is  a  fit  one  to 
glance  over  our  past  constitutional  history  so  as  to  see 
what  light  it  may  throw  upon  the  future.  Thus  far  we 
have  safely  weathered  all  the  gales  that  outward  interfer- 
ence and  inward  dissension  could  create.  But  are  we  to 
be  so  fortunate  during  the  next  hundred  years  ?  There 
have  been  great  social  and  political  changes  in  this  coun- 
try in  the  past  ;  indeed,  no  nation  has  ever  escaped  them. 
We  have  every  reason  to  believe,  not  only  that  these 
changes  will  continue  in  the  future,  but  that  they  will  be 
further  reaching  and  more  radical  than  any  the  world 
has  yet  seen.  If  this  be  true,  some  of  the  conditions 
that  are  to  produce  them  must  already  be  present  to  the 
eye  of  a  discriminating  observer.  Can  you  point  out 
any  of  them  ? 

Sir  Oracle. — Here  ;  wait  a  bit.  You  are  going  too 
fast.  It  is  difficult  to  write  about  the  earth  in  ten  pages. 
Let  me  begin  with  your  first  question,  and  cast  a  rapid 
glance  over  the  past, — a  task  that  is  rendered  easy  in 
view  of  a  monologue,  recently  published  by  James 
Bryce,  M.P.,  on  the  "Predictions  of  Hamilton  and  De 
Tocqueville."  Sharpsighted  as  Hamilton  and  his  con- 
temporaries undoubtedly  were,  they  made  a  sad  mess  of 
it  in  trying  to  point  out  the  perils  that  threatened  our 

7 


8  GLIMPSES  OF  THE  FUTURE. 

future.  The  opponents  of  the  Constitution  a  hundred 
years  ago  predicted  as  the  consequence  to  be  expected 
from  the  creation  of  an  effective  Federal  executive  :  (i) 
the  destruction  of  the  thirteen  States  as  commonwealths  ; 
(2)  the  creation  of  a  despot  in  the  person  of  the  Presi- 
dent ;  (3)  the  creation  of  an  oligarchy  in  the  Senatorial 
body  ;  (4)  usurpation  of  executive  functions,  and  diver- 
gence from  the  people  on  the  part  of  the  House  of  Rep- 
resentatives ;  (6)  a  tendency  to  provoke  foreign  Avars. 
Hamilton's  party,  on  the  other  hand,  tried  to  avoid  im- 
aginary ills.  The  evils  which  they  chiefly  feared  were  : 
(1)  the  spirit  and  power  of  faction  ;  (2)  sudden  impulses 
carrying  the  people  away  and  inducing  hasty  and  violent 
legislative  measures  ;  (3)  instability  in  foreign  policy  ; 
(4)  ill-considered  legislation  ;  (5)  the  encroachment  of  the 
Legislature — and  especially  of  the  House,  as  the  holder 
of  the  purse — upon  the  other  departments  ;  (6)  a  ten- 
dency on  the  part  of  the  States  to  overbear  the  Federal 
Government  ;  (7)  the  oppression  of  the  minority  by  the 
majority  ;  (8)  State  legislation  threatening  the  validity 
of  contracts  and  the  security  of  property.  It  will  be 
noted  that  the  Federalists  were  much  wiser  in  their  vati- 
cinations than  were  the  Jeffersonian  Democrats.  The 
States-rights  theory  which  Hamilton  and  his  friends  dis- 
trusted was  the  rock  upon  which  the  ship  of  state  was 
nearly  wrecked.  The  Democrats  were  altogether  wrong 
in  their  general  theories.  Our  own  statesmen  were  not, 
however,  the  only  ones  who  were  wrong  in  their  estimates 
of  what  was  dangerous  in  our  political  institutions.  Mr. 
Bryce  also  points  out  that  De  Tocqueville,  with  all  his 
philosophic  insight,  his  accuracy  in  stating  facts,  and  his 
lucidity  of  style,  failed  entirely  to  foresee  the  real  perils  in 
the  future  of  this  country,    He  did  not  comprehend  the 


OUR   POLITICAL  FUTURE.  g 

germs  of  States  rights  ;  nor  did  the  subsequent  growth  of 
the  spoils  system  come  within  his  vision.  He  was  blind 
to  the  influence  of  such  important  matters  as  our  system 
of  party  organizations,  the  power  of  money  in  politics, 
of  our  close  commercial  relations  in  binding  the  States 
together,  thus  producing  a  national  sentiment. 

Statesman.— In  view  of  the  mistakes  that  such  acute 
social  philosophers  as  Hamilton  and  De  Tocqueville  have 
made  in  the  past,  it  does  not  seem  as  if  we  pigmies  of  the 
present  have  much  chance  to  succeed  in  a  task  in  which 
they  failed.  Nevertheless,  I  judge  that  a  man  of  our 
own  day,  who  is  willing  to  discard  all  personal  precon- 
ceptions, and  to  investigate  facts,  as  such,  might  be  able 
to  predict  with  a  certain  degree  of  accuracy  our  future 
perils,  for,  without  any  of  the  acuteness  of  De  Tocque- 
ville, he  would  be  in  possession  of  a  mass  of  organized 
data  which  the  former  was  necessarily  without.  The 
facts  of  history  were  sufficiently  well  known  in  the  French- 
man's time,  but  they  were  not  sufficiently  well  under- 
stood. Hence  I  think,  Sir  Oracle,  with  full  conscious- 
ness that  you  are  making  use  of  glasses  provided  by 
others,  that  you  may  peek  a  little  into  the  gloom  that 
enshrouds  our  future. 

Sir  O.— I  confess  that  the  subject  is  one  to  which  I 
have  so  often  turned  my  attention,  that  I  can  talk,  if  not 
with  confidence,  at  least  with  a  certain  degree  of  famili- 
arity. And  it  is  all  the  more  necessary  that  it  should  be 
considered,  because  no  one  seems  to  think  of  giving 
it  attention.  All  over  the  world,  indeed,  and  in  Amer- 
ica quite  as  much  as  in  other  countries,  modern  changes 
of  a  social  character  are  being  carefully  watched.  To 
them  I  shall  refer  frequently.  Just  now  I  wish  to  confine 
myself  to  the  political  changes  which  are  to  be  expected 


IO  GLIMPSES  OF  THE  FUTURE. 

within  the  limits  of  our  own  country.  And  as  I  say,  the 
questions  suggested  by  this  head  have  hitherto  been  very 
largely  disregarded.  There  seems  to  be  a  general  ten- 
dency to  let  well  enough  alone,  and  to  confine  our  po- 
litical controversies  to  the  tariff  and  free  whiskey,  matters 
with  which,  by  this  time,  every  American  mind  must  be 
saturated.  Our  worship  of  our  Constitution  was  and  is  a 
species  of  "fetich  "  worship. 

Statesman. — Enough  of  this  vague  talk  about  change. 
Before  it  becomes  worth  any  thing  you  must  prove  that 
changes  are  necessary. 

Sir  O. — That  is  not,  I  believe,  a  particularly  difficult 
task.  Does  it  seem  probable  that  a  Constitution  which 
was  constructed  for  a  population  of  three  or  four  millions 
scattered  along  the  Atlantic  seaboard,  would  remain 
equally  well  adapted  to  a  population  of  65,000,000, 
spread  over  a  far  wider  area,  and  knit  together  as  tightly 
as  a  prevailing  community  of  interest  renders  possible. 

Statesman. — Such  changes  as  you  speak  of  might  in- 
deed necessitate  modification  of  our  laws,  but  surely  the 
vital  principle  which  lies  at  the  foundation  of  our  Consti- 
tution, the  principle  that  every  human  being  possesses  an 
inherent  right  to  freedom, — surely,  I  say,  that  principle 
remains  good  and  true,  no  matter  how  large  may  be  our 
area,  how  numerous  our  population,  or  how  close  our 
community  of  interest. 

Sir.  O. — Your  reply  brings  us  to  the  root  of  the  matter. 
That  grand  principle  which  you  so  confidently  flaunt  in 
my  face,  will  not,  I  think,  stand  the  test  of  criticism.  It 
has  been  useful  in  its  day  ;  but  its  day  is  over.  Undeni- 
ably the  founders  of  our  Constitution  were  impregnated 
with  it  ;  undeniably  it  has  worked  immense  good  in  its 
time  ;  and  undeniably  it  contains  within  it  the  germ  of  a 


OUR  POLITICAL   FUTURE.  II 

far  mightier  truth.  But  the  principle  as  it  was  understood 
by  Jefferson  was  not  a  great  principle  at  all  ;  but  a  very 
small  one.  It  was  not  a  universal  truth  ;  but  only  a  half 
truth,  applicable  merely  to  certain  conditions.  Our 
statesman  got  it  from  Rousseau  ;  and  with  Rousseau  it 
was  merely  negative.  He  saw,  as  Luther  had  seen  before 
him,  and  as  Goethe  saw  after  him,  that  the  great  war  of 
the  future  was  the  war  for  the  liberation  of  humanity 
from  the  customs  and  opinions  of  the  past.  Unfortu- 
nately, however,  Rousseau  thought  this  principle  meant 
emancipation  from  all  relations,  instead  of  merely  eman- 
cipation from  past  relations.  Hence  he  exalts  the  in- 
dividual to  the  skies,  and  affirms  the  right  of  private 
judgment.  Hence,  too,  he  was  the  bitter  enemy  of  any 
one  who  would  limit  the  individual  in  any  way,  forgetting 
that  it  was  not  limitation  as  such  that  was  undesirable, 
but  only  such  limitations  as  were  burdensome  and  ill- 
adapted  to  his  conditions.  This  defect  in  Rousseau's 
principle  has  been  pointed  out  recently  by  many  different 
writers,  and  by  none  more  effectively  than  Matthew 
Arnold,  all  of  whose  writings  on  social  topics  are  simply 
vigorous  polemics  against  the  doctrine  that  men  should 
be  allowed  to  do  as  they  like,  instead  of  being  taught  to 
do  as  they  ought.  So  much  for  the  principle  in  general. 
In  our  own  country  it  embodied  itself  in  the  practical 
maxim  that  "that  government  is  best  that  governs  least." 
The  reason  for  this  is  obvious  ;  the  individual  must  not 
be  subjected  to  what  is  called  the  political  yoke. 

Statesman. — Well  !  is  not  that  true  enough  ?  The 
history  of  governmental  legislation  has  been  largely  the 
history  of  a  mass  of  gigantic  errors.  Recollect  the 
mixture  of  pitiable  inconsistency,  unwarrantable  inter- 
ference, and  unjustifiable  oppression  which   passed  for 


12  GLIMPSES  OF  THE  FUTURE. 

governmental  action  in  France  before  the  Revolution. 
Is  any  other  illustration  necessary  ? 

Sir  O. — Yes  !  The  example  that  you  give  to  illus- 
trate your  point  is  not  in  itself  sufficient.  A  thousand 
instances  both  of  wise  and  unwise  governmental  action 
may  be  given.  The  question  is  one  to  be  settled,  not 
by  instances,  but  by  arguments.  Oppression,  undoubt- 
edly, is  a  bad  thing  ;  but  it  can  exist  only  where  the  in- 
terests of  the  governing  classes  differ  from  the  interests 
of  the  people.  Such  was  the  state  of  affairs  in  France 
previous  to  the  Revolution  ;  but  such  is  not  the  state  of 
affairs  at  present,  either  in  France  or  in  the  other  civil- 
ized nations.  That  is  to  say,  we  have  representative 
government  to  a  greater  or  lesser  degree  over  the  larger 
part  of  Europe  and  all  of  America.  Hence  there  is 
no  danger  that  conditions  will  be  such  that  the  inter- 
est of  the  governors  will  differ  in  any  radical  way 
from  the  interests  of  the  governed.  It  is  true,  just  so 
long  as  selfishness  exists  in  man,  there  will  be  acts  of 
maladministration  ;  but  at  the  present  time  I  do  not 
think  that  such  acts  are  either  numerous  enough  or 
important  enough  to  constitute  a  presumption  against 
government  action. 

Statesman. — That  is  largely  a  matter  of  opinion. 
Mr.  Herbert  Spencer  would  probably  think  that  in  all 
doubtful  cases  there  would  be  a  presumption  against 
governmental  action.  But,  however  that  may  be,  I  do 
not  see  why  we  need  take  the  risk  even  of  the  acts  of 
maladministration,  which  are  confessedly  unavoidable. 
Leave  all  doubtful  cases  to  individual  initiative,  and 
thus  the  happiness  of  all  will  be  procured  by  each  pur- 
suing his  own. 

Sir  O. — Nonsense,  the  happiness  of  all  can  never  be 


OUR  POLITICAL  FUTURE.  I  3 

procured  by  everybody  acting  for  himself.  If  society 
consisted  of  a  number  of  independent  atoms  without 
any  essential  connection  one  with  another,  then,  indeed, 
the  happiness  of  each  would  mean  the  happiness  of  all. 
It  is  scarcely  necessary,  however,  to  insist  on  the  gratu- 
itousness of  any  such  assumption.  Society  is  an  organic 
unity.  The  individual  finds  his  true  development  only 
in  acting  for  the  good  of  the  whole  ;  and  if  each  acted 
for  his  trumpery  little  self  only,  war,  not  harmony, 
would  result.  Now,  the  function  of  government  has 
largely  been  in  the  past  to  keep  order  within  the  state 
and  to  prevent  aggression  from  without ;  hence  the 
right  of  taxation  and  the  right  to  organize  the  courts  has 
never  been  denied  the  central  authority.  So  much,  at 
least,  was  necessary  to  secure  the  happiness  of  the  peo- 
ple. Moreover,  in  my  opinion,  two  or  three  hundred 
years  ago,  or  even  one  hundred  years  ago,  but  very  little 
more  interference  was  necessary,  much  less  advisable. 
But  such  is  not  the  case  now,  for  the  whole  tendency  of 
our  modern  mechanical  inventions  has  been  to  make 
society  more  and  more  of  an  organism  and  less  and  less 
of  a  mere  aggregation  of  separate  atoms. 

Statesman. — After  taking  a  breathing  spell,  will  you 
explain  that  a  little  bit  more  in  full. 

Sir  O. — I  will  try,  for  the  point  is  essential  to  my  ar- 
gument. It  amounts  to  this,  viz.:  that  man  is  becoming 
more  and  more  dependent  on  his  fellows.  And  it  fol- 
lows from  this  that  action  by  the  individual  and  for 
the  individual  must  become  more  and  more  limited  in 
extent  ;  or,  to  put  it  more  correctly,  state  action  must 
become  more  and  more  important  and  far  reaching 
relative  to  the  action  of  the  individual.  I  have  time 
to    pause    only    over    one    instance    to    illustrate    this. 


14  GLIMPSES  OF  THE  FUTURE. 

Take  the  case  of  the  railways.  Their  efficient  and 
economical  management  concerns  not  the  individual 
owners  only,  but  the  whole  community.  It  is  mon- 
strous that  these  owners  should  be  allowed  to  rob  the 
people  in  the  way  they  do.  If  our  railways  had  been 
built  economically,  and  had  they  been  capitalized  for 
the  sum  which  they  have  cost,  their  earnings  would  fully 
suffice  to  pay  five  per  cent,  on  the  whole  capital  stock  at 
half  the  present  cost  to  the  traveller  and  shipper.  In 
other  words,  railways,  telegraphs,  and  all  corporate  en- 
terprises which  deal  with  immense  sums  of  capital  have 
so  important  a  social  element  in  them,  and  a  social  ele- 
ment which  is  so  constantly  growing,  that  government 
action  is  bound  to  become  more  and  more  employed.  I 
by  no  means  want  to  imply  that  all  government  action 
must  be  right  ;  but  only  that  there  is  a  growing  pre- 
sumption in  its  favor. 

Statesman. — Your  prediction  is  then  that  our  govern- 
ment will  become  more  and  more  paternal. 

Sir  O. — Yes  ;  not  only  our  government  but  all  govern- 
ments are  taking  on  new  and  varied  duties.  When  most 
of  the  nations  were  founded  the  king  or  emperor  had 
very  extensive  powers.  He  led  his  armies,  treated 
directly  with  foreign  powers,  was  his  own  treasurer, 
and  filled  as  far  as  possible  all  the  functions  of  the 
State  himself.  But  as  time  rolled  by  a  prime-minister 
appeared  to  deal  with  foreign  nations,  then  a  treasurer  to 
collect  the  taxes,  a  minister  of  justice  in  due  time  was 
recognized,  and  finally  marshals  and  generals  to  lead  the 
different  armies.  Compare,  for  instance,  the  cabinets  of 
King  Clovis  and  Louis  XI.  of  France  with  that  of  the 
present  French  Republican  government.  You  will  find 
that  the  tendency  is  towards  the  multiplication  of  depart- 


OUR  POLITICAL  FUTURE.  I  5 

ments  at  the  seat  of  governments  as  the  nation  grows. 
Notwithstanding  his  royal  prerogatives  how  little  real 
authority,  for  instance,  had  Edward  I.  of  England,  com- 
pared with  a  Gladstone  or  a  Salisbury,  the  uncrowned 
kings  of  to-day.  The  cabinets  of  the  latter  represent 
nearly  all  the  great  interests  of  the  nation.  Notice  how 
we  in  the  United  States  are  steadily  adding  to  the  func- 
tions of  the  general  government.  We  have  now  our 
educational,  agricultural,  statistical,  weather,  and  other 
bureaus,  not  to  speak  of  the  Inter-State  Commerce  Com- 
mission, none  of  which  were  thought  of  in  the  time  of 
Washington  and  Adams.  Within  a  few  years  we  will 
have  cabinet  secretaries,  representing  the  larger  inter- 
ests of  the  nation,  such  as  agriculture,  transportation, 
and  probably  labor.  The  Blair  education  bill  may  not 
become  a  law  while  Grover  Cleveland  is  President,  but  it 
is  as  certain  as  destiny  that  the  education  of  the  nation 
will  finally  be  placed  under  the  oversight  of  the  central 
government. 

Statesman. — As  a  matter  of  fact  what  you  say  is 
undoubtedly  true.  But  in  affirming  that  the  tendency 
is  a  good  one  you  have  Herbert  Spencer  and  many  other 
philosophers  against  you. 

Sir  O. — It  is  the  fact  that  I  am  insisting  on  at  present. 
I  appeal  to  the  common-sense  of  our  readers  if  it  is  not 
true  that  what  may  be  called  state  socialism  is  gaining 
ground.  It  is  within  my  own  memory  when  the  educa- 
tion of  children  was  a  family  affair.  When  it  was  first 
proposed  to  tax  the  property  of  the  state  to  educate  all 
the  children,  rich  old  bachelors  and  spinsters  as  well  as 
all  large  property-holders  protested  against  the  rank 
injustice  of  the  matter.  "  Why,"  they  asked,  "should 
we  be  taxed  to  educate  the  children  of  the  mass  of  the 


1 6  GLIMPSES  OF  THE  FUTURE. 

community  ?  This  is  state  socialism  pure  and  simple  "  ; 
and  so,  indeed,  it  is  !  Then  look  at  the  roads  of  the 
country.  It  is  not  so  many  years  since  the  toll-gate  was 
to  be  found  at  every  crossing,  showing  that  they  were 
private  property  ;  now  they  are  free  highways,  made  so 
by  the  state.  Look  at  our  public  parks.  The  real  estate 
of  the  rich  is  taxed  to  furnish  new  pleasure  grounds  for 
those  who  have  no  property.  The  dispensaries  give  not 
only  medical  advice  but  medicines  to  the  poor  free  of 
charge.  The  art  galleries  of  the  world  are  thrown  open 
to  everybody,  and  the  very  palaces  of  the  kings  in  Europe 
are  no  longer  their  own,  but  are  free  to  the  multitude  and 
serve  as  local  museums  and  places  of  popular  resort. 

Statesman. — But  is  not  Herbert  Spencer  justified  in 
protesting  against  this  absorption  of  authority  by  the  cen- 
tral powers  ?  This  state  socialism  or  paternalism,  does 
it  not  destroy  local  self-government  and  paralyze  indi- 
vidual initiative  ?  In  other  words,  if  the  head  gets  too 
big  will  not  the  limbs  be  atrophied  ? 

Sir  O. — The  great  evolutionist  should  have  paid  more 
attention  to  the  lessons  of  his  own  studies  in  biology. 
From  that  science  he  would  learn  that  as  the  head  of  the 
animal  enlarges  its  limbs  become  more  alive  ;  in  other 
words,  the  whole  organism  grows  more  active.  Every 
new  function  in  the  body  of  the  animal  has  its  corre- 
sponding nerve  centre  in  the  brain,  and  this  is  what  is  tak- 
ing place  in  all  civilized  nations.  The  local  circulation 
is  stimulated,  not  weakened,  by  the  increased  activity  of  the 
brain.  The  individual  bee  is  the  better  protected  because 
the  good  of  the  hive  is  the  first  consideration  of  every 
colony  of  honey-makers.  Herbert  Spencer,  when  a  very 
young  man,  had  the  misfortune  to  write  a  book  entitled 
"  Social  Statics,"  in  which  he  committed  himself  fully 


OUR  POLITICAL  FUTURE.  \J 

to  the  Manchester  school  of  political  economy.  These 
writers  saw  only  half  a  truth,  and  Mr.  Spencer's  philos- 
ophy, as  applied  to  government  and  business,  is  conse- 
quently as  hopelessly  wrong  as  was  the  Ptolemaic 
astronomy.  The  Democratic  party,  in  following  the 
ignis-fatuus  of  State-rights — that  is,  of  home  rule  as 
against  Federal  authority, — nearly  wrecked  the  nation 
in  the  great  civil  war.  In  truth  the  municipalities 
and  the  State  are  more  powerful  than  ever  they  were, 
nothwithstanding  the  growing  paternalism  of  the  central 
government. 


OUR  POLITICAL  FUTURE. 

Continued. 


Statesman. — Well !  we  dwelt  some  time  on  the  first 
topic  we  started,  Sir  Oracle,  suppose  we  try  to  be  more 
specific  and  brief  now.  What  is  the  most  important  po- 
litical danger  that  you  fear  ? 

Sir  Oracle. — The  lack  of  flexibility  in  our  Constitu- 
tion. It  is  almost  impossible  to  change  it,  except,  as  I 
have  said,  under  the  stress  of  some  great  calamity. 
England  is  lucky  in  having  no  written  Constitution.  An 
act  of  Parliament  enables  the  government  to  meet  any 
emergency  ;  but  our  methods  of  amendment  are  so  dila- 
tory, and  so  difficult  is  it  to  get  our  people  to  act  together, 
that  our  governmental  machine  is  getting  out  of  repair. 
It  is  impossible  to  make  its  various  parts  conform  to  ex- 
isting conditions. 

Statesman. — Specify  some  of  the  defects  in  our  Con- 
stitution ? 

Sir  O. — Well,  take  our  Electoral  College.  Originally 
that  was  intended  to  be  a  real  deliberative  body.  It  was 
to  choose  a  President  for  the  people.  But  in  practice 
the  College  obeys  the  behests  of  the  party  Conventions. 
These  great  organizations,  which  determine  who  shall  be 
the  candidates,  are  utterly  unknown  to  our  Constitution. 
They  are  extra-legal,  but  none  the  less  potent  for  all  that. 

Statesman. — What  other  trouble  do  you  see  in  the 
future  ? 

18 


OUR  POLITICAL  FUTURE.  1 9 

Sir  O. — There  are  too  many  questions  involved  in 
that  inquiry  to  do  them  all  justice  in  a  short  conversa- 
tion. I  might  mention  cursorily  the  practical  denial  of 
justice  in  our  courts.  In  an  age  of  steam  and  lightning 
communication  our  tedious  legal  forms  waste  the  time 
and  money  of  a  very  busy  people.  Our  Supreme  Court 
is  three  years  and  a  half  behind  its  business.  Every 
murderer  can  now  have  two  or  three  trials.  Thus  time 
is  wasted  and  costs  continue  to  increase.  By-and-by  the 
people  will  not  stand  it,  and  a  social  convulsion  may  re- 
sult. 

Statesman. — Any  thing  else? 

Sir  O. — The  growth  of  corporate  power  is  another 
serious  matter.  The  recent  discussions  as  to  trusts  and 
other  great  monopolies  throw  a  great  deal  of  light  on 
that  subject.  Then  the  accumulation  of  wealth  in  a  few 
hands,  which  is  steadily  going  on,  will  unquestionably 
lead  to  a  grave  agitation  which  may  have  vital  conse- 
quences on  the  future  of  the  country.  I  am  quite  sure 
that  the  American  of  the  twentieth  century  will  not  con- 
sent to  live  under  a  merely  selfish  plutocracy. 

Statesman. — You  have  said  nothing  about  the  spoils 
system  ? 

Sir  O. — That  was  one  of  the  curses  of  the  past,  and 
will  trouble  us  for  some  time  in  the  future.  But  the  ten- 
dency in  this  country  is  toward  civil-service  reform. 
The  politicians  of  both  parties  do  not  like  any  change 
from  the  old  bad  ways,  but  the  public  sentiment  of  the 
nation  insists  upon  it,  and  before  the  close  of  this  cen- 
tury I  expect  to  see  our  civil  service  as  honest  and  as 
efficient  as  our  military  and  naval  services  have  always 
been.  Moreover,  the  adoption  of  the  Australian  system 
of  voting  will  do  much  to  purify  our  elections. 


20  GLIMPSES  OF  THE  FUTURE. 

Statesman. — But  these  changes  are  generally  of  ra- 
ther small  importance. 

Sir  O. — I  know  it.  So  I  pass  from  these  merely  po- 
litical questions  to  the  social  questions  that  underly 
them.  Our  Constitution  would  not  need  to  be  flexible,  if 
our  social  state  would  forever  remain  the  same.  The 
time  for  radical  changes  must  come  ;  and  such  changes 
cannot  be  brought  about  under  our  Constitution.  Hence 
I  think  that  a  new  constitution  is  inevitable  some  time. 
How  radical  the  changes  will  be  I  cannot  pretend  to  say. 
The  necessity  for  some  readjustment  of  the  relations  be- 
tween capital  and  labor  will,  I  think,  bring  them  about. 
I  do  not  believe  the  poor  are  growing  poorer,  though  I  do 
hold  that  the  very  rich  will  become  still  richer.  It  is  the 
middle  class  which  will  become  reduced  in  numbers.  A 
few  of  the  brainiest  or  the  more  lucky  will  find  their 
way  into  the  ranks  of  the  very  rich,  but  the  great  bulk  of 
them  will  be  forced  down  into  the  artisan  class.  They 
will  leaven  the  mass  of  workingmen,  and  the  latter  will 
be  greatly  benefited  by  the  energy  and  leadership  of 
their  former  employers.  The  nineteenth-century  indus- 
trial machinery  has  failed  in  one  particular.  The  mass 
of  the  working  class  have  not  profited  as  much  as  they 
should  have  done  by  the  wonderful  improvements  in  the 
mechanic  arts.  A  disproportionate  share  of  the  saving 
effected  by  improved  machinery  has  gone  to  the  capital- 
ist class.  Of  course  the  workers  are  better  fed,  housed, 
and  clothed,  have  shorter  hours  and  more  comforts  than 
their  forefathers,  who  lived  earlier  in  the  century,  and 
bi  f<ne  the  application  of  steam  to  industrial  processes. 
But  the  working  people  have  had  a  trying  time  of  it,  due 
to  the  displacement  of  their  labor  by  mechanical  inven- 
tion.    But  I  am  in  hopes  that  the  twentieth  century  will 


OUR  POLITICAL  FUTURE.  21 

see  this  wrong  righted  ;  still  I  fear  that  there  is  a  social 
war  ahead  of  us  before  the  final  compromise  is  effected. 

Staesman. — But  what  shape  will  it  take  ?  What  will 
be  the  cause  and  the  occasion  of  this  social  disturbance  ? 

Sir  O. — Heretofore  we  have  had  a  safety-valve  in  the 
cheap  lands  of  the  West ;  there  was  always  a  certain  por- 
tion of  the  most  provident  workingmen  who  could  go  to 
the  soil  for  sustenance  when  employment  was  slack  in 
the  manufacturing  centres.  Within  a  quarter  of  a  cen- 
tury there  will  be  no  more  cheap  land,  while  large  addi- 
tions will  be  made  to  the  centres  of  population.  The 
ranks  of  labor  will  be  augmented  and  acute  distress  will 
be  prevalent  during  the  frequent  commercial  crises. 
Hence  the  danger  of  angry  mobs  of  discontented  work- 
people. 

Statesman. — I  judge  that  time  is  further  off  than  you 
think.  There  has  yet  been  little  appreciable  rise  in  the 
price  of  Southern  farm-lands.  There  are  millions  of 
acres  of  arable  soil  in  the  northern  zone  of  the  Southern 
States  which  have  yet  to  be  occupied.  Then  in  the  far 
West  irrigating  canals  are  being  dug  to  utilize  vast  regions 
which  have  been  heretofore  regarded  as  deserts.  Now 
one  of  the  peculiarities  of  irrigated  lands  is  that  but  few 
acres  are  sufficient  for  the  work  of  the  husbandman  ;  he 
gets  as  large  crops  from  thirty  or  forty  acres  as  the 
farmer  who  depends  on  rain  does  from  160  acres.  Cali- 
fornia is  destined  to  have  a  dense  population,  because  a 
family  can  be  supported  on  ten  acres  of  soil.  Of  course 
the  time  must  arrive  when  the  country  will  be  overpopu- 
lated  ;  but  will  not  science  come  to  our  aid  and  so  mul- 
tiply food  products  as  to  give  every  one  an  abundance  at 
a  minimum  price  ?  Is  not  the  tendency  towards  cheap- 
ness in  every  thing  ? 


12  GLIMPSES  OF  THE  FUTURE. 

Sir  O. — Yes,  it  is  ;  but  we  cannot  reason  on  the  basis 
of  what  may  be.  We  must  take  the  world  as  it  is,  and  it 
certainly  looks  as  if  when  land  rises  in  value  the  pressure 
upon  the  urban  population  will  become  more  severe  than 
it  is  now. 

Statesman. — You  predict,  then,  social  disturbances 
growing  out  of  an  increasing  laboring  population  who 
are  discontented  because  educated  above  their  condition 
and  who  will  revolt  if  subject  to  privation  in  a  commer- 
cial crisis. 

Sir  O. — Yes  ;  but  are  we  not  straying  from  the  sub- 
ject ?  We  set  out  to  foretell  the  probable  changes  likely 
to  occur  in  the  history  and  constitution  of  our  country 
during  the  next  century. 

Statesman. — That  inquiry  suggests  manifest  destiny. 
Of  course,  before  half  a  century  is  over  Ave  shall  have 
acquired  the  Dominion  of  Canada,  and  shall  have  ab- 
sorbed Mexico  and  Central  America.  The  West  India 
Islands  will  have  become  ours  as  well  as  the  Sandwich 
Islands.  By  that  time  we  will  have  a  great  foreign  com- 
merce of  our  own,  and  will  necessarily  have  naval  sta- 
tions in  distant  seas. 

Sir  O. — That  is  a  large  programme,  and  if  carried  out 
will  necessitate  vital  changes  in  the  constitution  and 
methods  of  our  government.  We  can  absorb  the  Domin- 
ion without  doing  us  any  harm  ;  nay,  with  positive  ad- 
vantage, for  the  Canadians  are  of  our  own  race  and  are 
trained  in  local  self-government.  This  would  settle  the 
fishery  business  and  all  other  disputes  on  a  very  satisfac- 
tory basis  ;  but  Mexico,  Central  America,  the  Sandwich 
Islands,  and  the  West  India  Islands  will  involve  govern- 
ments which  cannot  be  Democratic.  We  will  never  con- 
fer the  right  of  suffrage  upon  the  blacks,  the  mongrels 


OUR  POLITICAL  FUTURE.  2$ 

of  Mexico  or  Central  America,  or  the  Hawaiians.  They 
cannot  govern  themselves,  and  for  us  to  do  it  would  be 
against  the  genius  of  our  Constitution  in  its  present 
form  ;  still  I  have  no  doubt  we  shall  make  the  attempt. 

Statesman. — Then  may  there  not  be  some  difficulty 
with  our  own  black  population  ?  Is  there  not  danger 
that  the  Gulf  States  may  be  given  over  wholly  to  the 
negroes  ?  According  to  the  census  returns  the  increase 
of  the  whites  from  1870  to  1880  was  at  the  rate  of  29.90, 
while  the  blacks  increased  at  the  rate  of  34.67.  At  this 
rate  the  whites  would  in  time  be  so  outnumbered  in  the 
Southern  States  that  they  would  not  count  as  a  political 
or  industrial  factor. 

Sir  O. — The  census  of  1880  showing  the  dispropor- 
tionate large  increase  of  the  blacks  was  a  surprise,  for 
the  whites  had  the  advantage  of  increase  by  foreign  im- 
migration, and  it  was  supposed  that  the  freed  slaves  would 
show  a  heavy  mortality,  in  view  of  their  habits  and  indif- 
ference to  the  well-being  of  their  offspring.  The  census 
of  1890  may  tell  a  different  story.  I  suppose  we  must  be 
prepared  for  an  increase  in  the  black  population  that 
borders  on  the  Gulf.  The  manufacturing  interests  of 
the  new  iron  and  coal  regions  of  Virginia,  Tennessee,  and 
Alabama  will  necessarily  bring  in  a  large  white  popula- 
tion, which  will  drive  the  negroes  southward  into  the 
more  purely  agricultural  districts.  I  presume  the  race 
of  mulattoes  is  dying  out.  Some  few  will  intermingle 
with  whites,  but  the  bulk  of  them  will  become  darker  in 
hue  as  each  generation  passes  by,  for  the  irregular  alli- 
ances between  blacks  and  whites  are  not  by  any  means 
as  frequent  under  freedom  as  during  slavery.  Hence 
the  dividing  line  between  the  two  races  will  yearly  be- 
come more  marked.     If  the  blacks  left   to  themselves 


24  GLIMPSES  OF  THE  FUTURE. 

become  as  degraded  as  in  the  West  India  Islands,  the  time 
may  come  when  they  will  be  treated  as  badly  as  the 
Chinese  and  Red  Indians  are  now,  even  to  the  extent  of 
depriving  them  of  their  political  privileges.  Practically 
this  is  the  case  to-day  over  a  large  section  of  the  South. 
The  white  race  is  dominant  and  will  keep  their  position, 
no  matter  how  numerous  the  negroes  may  become. 

Statesman. — Do  you  think  then  that  the  American 
people  may  forget  the  Declaration  of  Independence,  and 
reverse  the  legislation  favoring  the  colored  people,  which 
began  with  President  Lincoln's  Emancipation  Proclama- 
tion ? 

Sir  O. — I  would  hardly  go  as  far  as  that.  I  do  not  ex- 
pect to  see  slavery  restored,  but  should  not  be  surprised 
if  in  the  next  hundred  years  there  was  a  national  system 
of  employing  labor,  under  which  every  able-bodied  man 
or  woman  would  be  set  to  work,  if  they  could  not  get  re- 
munerative employment  in  any  other  way.  In  the  com- 
ing scientific  age  there  will  be  less  sentimentalism  than 
there  is  now.  Men  and  women  will  not  be  allowed  to 
drink  themselves  to  death.  The  tramp  will  not  be  tole- 
rated, and  the  idle  and  vicious  will  be  put  under  the 
severest  restraint.  More  attention  will  be  given  to  our 
duties,  and  less  will  be  said  about  our  rights.  I  believe 
that  the  law  will  go  so  far  as  to  prevent  the  criminal  and 
diseased  from  marrying  and  having  families.  Children 
will  not  be  born  under  conditions  that  will  ensure  them 
life-long  misery — or  make  them  a  peril  to  the  community. 

Statesman. — All  this  is  aside.  What  other  influences 
do  you  see  at  work  which  may  be  important  factors  in 
determining  the  course  of  our  history. 

Sir  O. — The  drift  of  events  is  discouraging  legisla- 
tive governments.    We  are  beginning  to  find  that  boards 


OUR  POLITICAL  FUTURE.  2$ 

of  aldermen  and  State  legislators  tend  to  be  corrupt,  be- 
cause it  is  impossible  to  fix  responsibility  on  evil-doers. 
Hence  we  see  that  in  our  municipalities  larger  powers 
are  lodged  in  our  mayors  and  heads  of  departments, 
while  the  privileges  of  our  aldermen  are  being  gradually 
cut  down.  The  amendments  to  the  laws  for  the  last  ten 
years  are  all  in  the  direction  of  giving  almost  unchecked 
power  to  the  mayors  of  large  cities.  The  experiment 
was  first  tried  in  Brooklyn,  and  worked  so  well  that  the 
charters  of  Boston,  New  York,  Philadelphia,  and  many 
minor  cities  have  been  altered  so  as  to  strengthen  the 
power  of  the  mayor  and  take  away  the  authority  of  the 
local  legislative  boards.  Home  Rule  has  broken  down 
in  that  respect  in  this  country.  In  many  State  constitu- 
tions will  be  found  provisions  prohibiting  counties  and 
cities  from  creating  permanent  debts  beyond  a  certain 
percentage  of  the  taxable  value  of  the  realty  affected.  It 
was  found  that  aldermen  and  supervisors  all  over  the 
Union  were  utterly  reckless  in  the  expenditure  of  money. 
In  time  State  legislators  will  have  their  wings  clipped,  for 
the  reason  that  they  do  not  give  us  wise  and  economical 
government.  As  to  our  national  legislature,  it  will  be 
observed  that  it  is  growing  to  be  less  and  less  a  debating 
body.  An  orator  of  great  power  was  once  a  force  in  the 
House  of  Representatives  ;  but  the  individual  member 
now  counts  for  little  unless  he  is  chairman  of  an  im- 
portant committee.  It  is  in  these  sub-congresses,  as  they 
may  be  called,  that  the  real  work  is  done.  Every  law 
that  is  proposed  has  to  go  to  its  appropriate  committee. 
As  a  council  of  war  never  fights,  so  a  house  committee 
never  sanctions  legislation  of  a  bold  and  striking  char- 
acter. Every  bill  reported  is  of  a  commonplace  charac- 
ter, representing  a  compromise  in  which  some  routine 


26  GLIMPSES  OF  THE   FUTURE. 

congressman  has  the  most  to  say.  The  speeches  in  the 
lower  House  have  so  little  significance  at  present,  that 
the  newspapers  do  not  report  them.  It  is  only  a  few  of 
the  Senators  that  have  the  ear  of  the  country. 

Statesman. — Can  you  mention  any  other  possible 
seed  of  internal  trouble  ? 

Sir  O. — Yes  ;  I  may  refer  to  one  other.  Exclusive 
lawyer  rule  will  yet  create  violent  disturbance.  Our 
whole  machinery  of  justice  is  out  of  gear,  for  it  is  becom- 
ing more  costly  and  inefficient.  As  time  rolls  by,  crime 
is  not  punished,  justice  is  not  done.  The  lawyer  learns 
nothing,  forgets  nothing.  All  the  inventions  and  busi- 
ness devices  of  the  age  tend  to  abridge  space,  limit  time, 
and  save  money,  but  the  legal  machinery  grows  yearly 
more  inefficient  and  wasteful  of  time  and  money.  Vigi- 
lance committees  will  exist  in  every  part  of  the  country 
if  this  state  of  things  continues. 

Statesman. — I  can  understand  why  a  close  mo- 
nopoly of  government  by  one  profession,  should  be 
abused.  But  is  there  not  some  balm  in  Gilead  ?  In 
other  words,  does  not  the  United  States  owe  something 
to  the  legal  profession  ?  And  may  not  the  lawyers  be 
useful  in  the  working  of  our  institutions  in  the  years  to 
come  ? 

Sir  O. — I  have  always  thought  it  unfortunate  that  our 
rulers  were  so  exclusively  lawyers.  Since  the  beginning 
of  our  government  it  is  safe  to  say  that  we  have  had 
among  our  legislators  and  executives  twice  as  many  law- 
yers as  representatives  from  all  other  classes  besides. 
This  is  as  true  of  our  local  as  of  our  State  and  national 
legislative  bodies.  In  other  words,  lawyers  make  our 
laws  as  legislators,  expound  them  as  judges,  and  execute 
them  as  mayors,  governors,  and  presidents. 


OUR  POLITICAL  FUTURE.  2J 

Statesman. — On  the  whole,  I  think  that  lawyer-rule 
in  this  country  has  not  been  an  unmixed  evil.  In  work- 
ing our  Republican  institutions  it  required  men  trained 
in  a  profession,  which  called  for  adaptability.  Soldiers 
and  men  of  business  are  too  often  uncompromising. 
They  go  straight  to  the  mark,  even  at  the  risk  of  disorder 
and  violence.  It  has  passed  into  an  axiom  in  England, 
that  politics  should  not  be  logical  ;  and  the  lawyer 
reaches  his  results  by  the  adaptation  of  means  to  ends, 
without  reference  to  consistency.  So  far  the  legists  have 
done  well  by  the  country.  Take  the  case  of  the  Electoral 
Commission  which  made  Hayes  President.  It  was  a  de- 
vice to  get  over  what  seemed  to  be  a  situation  which  did 
not  admit  of  compromise.  Were  it  not  that  Tilden  was 
a  compromising  and  personally  a  rather  timid  lawyer, 
we  might  then  have  had  civil  war.  The  whole  course 
of  our  history  would  have  been  changed  had  an  ambitious 
self-willed  man  like  Stephen  Douglass,  or  a  soldier  like 
General  Hancock  been  in  Tilden's  place. 

Sir  O. — It  may  be  that  the  lawyer  will  do  something 
to  make  up  for  the  want  of  elasticity  in  our  written  Con- 
stitution. As  you  say,  the  legal  mind  is  fertile  in  ex- 
pedients and  devices.  When  an  emergency  arises  which 
calls  for  national  action  not  warranted  by  the  text  of  the 
Constitution,  the  lawyer-statesman  will  be  ready  with  his 
new  glosses  and  interpretations  of  words  so  as  to  meet 
the  difficulty.  Our  civil  conflict  was  fought  outside  of 
our  Constitution  under  an  undefinable  war  power.  Our 
organic  law  says  in  so  many  words  that  silver  and  gold 
shall  be  our  only  currency  ;  but  the  Supreme  Court  has 
decided  that  in  peace  as  in  war  Congress  can  make  paper 
money  legal-tender.  Hence  in  the  absence  of  any  con- 
stitutional   amendments   our   courts  will   interpret   the 


28  GLIMPSES  OF  THE  FUTURE. 

words  of  our  Constitution  in  a  way  to  make  it  conform 
to  the  emergency  and  to  a  common-sense  dealing  with 
the  situation  as  it  arises.  As  in  the  great  religions  of  the 
world,  the  original  doctrines  are  negatived  and  antago- 
nized by  legend,  tradition,  glosses,  and  downright  falsifi- 
cation ;  so  it  may  be  with  our  Constitution  in  the  next 
century.  That  instrument,  as  interpreted  by  the  courts, 
may  be  entirely  different  from  what  its  original  text  would 
imply. 

Statesman. — That  will  do  for  internal  troubles. 
What  fears  have  you  from  our  external  relations  ? 

Sir  O. — I  think  it  is  very  likely  that  some  nation 
with  a  large  fleet  will  capture  our  principal  seaport 
cities.  There  are  six  billions  of  property  on  our  coasts 
absolutely  unprotected.  The  fleets  of  England,  France, 
or  Germany  could  easily  occupy  New  York  and  other 
cities,  and  could  exact  an  indemnity  of  five  hundred 
millions  of  dollars.  Our  own  Admiral  Porter  voices 
the  general  verdict  of  our  naval  and  military  officers, 
as  well  as  of  intelligent  civilians,  when  he  says  that 
we  are  utterly  defenceless,  and  that  it  would  take  twenty 
years  of  lavish  expenditure  to  make  us  safe  from  foreign 
attack.  It  will  be  remembered  that  in  the  war  of  1812, 
before  the  era  of  steamships,  a  British  fleet  captured 
Washington  and  burnt  our  Capitol. 

Statesman. — But  what  harm  are  we  doing  to  foreign 
nations  ?  What  grievance  have  they  against  us  ?  And 
if  we  avoid  all  cause  of  quarrel  and  keep  to  ourselves, 
why  should  we  be  attacked  ?  This  is  an  era  of  peace 
and  industry. 

Sir  O. — Stuff  and  nonsense.  There  are  more  armed 
soldiers  in  the  Christian  nations  of  Europe  to-day  than 
was  ever  before  known  in  the  history  of  the  world.     We 


OUR  POLITICAL   FUTURE.  29 

are  on  the  eve  of  one  of  the  mightiest  conflicts  that  his- 
tory has  ever  recorded.  China  and  Japan  were  both 
peace-loving  nations,  without  armies  or  defences,  willing 
to  do  any  thing  to  avoid  fighting,  but  the  great  powers 
of  Europe  compelled  them  to  open  communication  for 
the  sake  of  trade,  and  Protestant  England  and  Catholic 
France  sent  their  armies  to  Pekin  to  force  the  Chinese  to 
buy  their  opium  and  goods.  There  is  no  instance  in 
history  of  a  nation  that  was  rich  and  unprotected  which 
was  not  plundered  by  some  robber  nation  that  was  well 
armed. 

Statesman. — What  particular  nation  do  you  fear  ? 

Sir  O. — Germany.  In  the  coming  international  war 
the  Germans  will  want  money.  England  may  be  her 
ally,  as  well  as  Italy.  These  powers  could  easily  cap- 
ture our  sea-coast,  and  Great  Britain,  through  its  Wel- 
land  Canal,  could  put  a  fleet  of  gun-boats  on  the  lakes 
and  destroy  or  lay  under  contribution  Rochester,  Buf- 
falo, Toledo,  Cleveland,  Chicago,  and  Milwaukee.  Our 
people  know  that  we  are,  potentially,  the  most  powerful 
military  and  naval  nation  on  earth,  but  actually  at  pres- 
ent we  are  not  in  a  position  to  defend  ourselves  against 
a  feeble  power.  We  have  neither  war-ships,  guns,  nor 
fortifications.  The  slugger  Sullivan,  if  unarmed,  would 
be  at  the  mercy  of  a  boy  six  years  old  equipped  with  a 
loaded  revolver.  That  is  our  position  to-day.  The  time 
is  coming  when  we  shall  be  terribly  humiliated. 

Statesman. — The  prospect  you  give  us  is  not  very 
encouraging.  I,  for  my  part,  am  inclined  to  be  more 
hopeful  ;  but  I  see  there  is  no  use  in  arguing  the  matter. 
Cannot  you  point  out  some  of  the  rosy  aspects  of  our 
possible  future  ? 

Sir  O. — That  has  been  done  so  often  and  so  effectual- 


30  GLIMPSES  OF  THE  FUTURE. 

ly  that  I  thought  that  I  might  be  spared  the  task.  I 
suppose,  however,  a  few  words  may  not  come  amiss. 
Our  country  is  increasing  in  wealth  and  population.  Its 
people  will,  I  think,  be  as  wise  in  the  future  as  in  the 
past.  Education  is  being  more  widely  diffused,  and 
somehow  I  believe  that  while  we  shall  have  serious  diffi- 
culties to  meet  we  shall  overcome  them  as  speedily  in  the 
second  century  of  our  existence  as  we  did  in  the  first 
century.  Before  many  years  I  think  we  shall  annex  the 
Dominion,  and,  somehow  or  other,  we  shall  rehabilitate 
our  merchant  marine  and  our  flag  will  again  be  seen  on 
every  sea  Neither  have  we  much  to  fear  from  the  ex- 
tension of  our  territory.  The  tendencies  of  all  modern 
nations  is  to  larger  aggregations  of  domain.  Compare 
the  Germany  and  Italy  of  1888  with  the  Germany  and 
Italy  of  twenty-five  years  ago,  and  you  will  see  the  truth 
of  my  statement.  Notice  also  the  fate  of  all  attempts  at 
the  disintegration  of  peoples.  Hungary  could  not  de- 
tach itself  from  Austria,  nor  Ireland  from  Great  Britain, 
nor  the  Southern  States  of  this  Union  from  the  North- 
ern. Steam  and  the  telegraph  have  a  constant  ten- 
dency to  bind  people  together.  Mr.  Bryce,  whom  I 
have  cpioted,  makes  this  pregnant  observation  :  "  Nor 
does  the  growth  of  the  Union  make  the  retention  of  its 
parts  more  difficult.  On  the  contrary,  the  United  States 
is  a  smaller  country  now,  when  it  stretches  from  the  Bay 
of  Fundy  to  the  Gulf  of  California,  with  its  60,000,000 
people,  than  it  was  with  its  13,000,000,  just  as  the  civilized 
world  was  larger  at  the  time  of  Herodotus  than  it  is 
now,  for  it  took  twice  as  many  months  to  travel  from 
Persepolis  or  the  Caspian  Sea  to  the  Pillars  of  Her- 
cules as  it  does  now  to  circumnavigate  the  globe  ;  one 
was  obliged  to  use   more  languages   and   the  journey 


OUR  POLITICAL   FUTURE.  3 1 

was  inconceivably  more  dangerous."  But  for  all  that 
can  be  said  about  our  prosperity,  I,  for  one,  wish  that  we 
could  commemorate  the  adoption  of  the  first  Constitution 
by  holding  a  great  national  convention  to  revise  it.  It 
would  be  a  splendid  education  for  this  generation  if  we 
were  once  more  to  discuss  the  conditions  which  lie  at 
the  basis  of  efficient  government.  At  present  our  politi- 
cal discussions  are  petty  and  personal.  Were  it  pro- 
posed to  hold  a  national  convention,  they  would  gain 
immensely  in  dignity  and  weight. 


OUR   FUTURE   FOREIGN   POLICY. 


Publicist. — I  see  it  is  officially  announced  that  our 
new  navy  will  consist  of  thirty-one  vessels.  This  includes 
cruisers,  floating  batteries,  and  despatch  boats,  all  of 
which  have  been  or  will  be  constructed  with  a  view  to 
the  exigencies  of  modern  naval  warfare.  In  a  few  years, 
therefore,  we  shall  be  able  to  assume  a  somewhat  bolder 
front  to  secondary  nations  ;  but  the  inadequacy  of  our 
shore  defences  in  the  neighborhood  of  our  great  seaport 
cities  will,  for  many  years,  force  us  to  speak  with  bated 
breath  to  first-class  naval  powers  like  Great  Britain, 
Germany,  France,   or  Italy. 

Sir  Oracle. — I  have  always  been  a  persistent  advo- 
cate of  the  creation  of  a  navy  suitable  for  defensive  pur- 
poses. History  is  full  of  warnings  as  to  the  unwisdom 
of  leaving  rich  cities  or  communities  at  the  mercy  of 
well-armed  powers.  The  robber  instinct  is  as  strong 
to-day  as  ever  among  organized  governments,  as  witness 
the  attitude  of  the  Western  powers  towards  China,  Japan, 
and  indeed  all  semi-civilized  and  savage  people,  but  I 
should  deplore  any  disposition  to  build  a  navy  that 
would  be  a  menace  to  foreign  powers.  We  Americans 
are  a  venturesome  and  vainglorious  people  ;  and  if  we 
had  an  effective  naval  force  there  would  be  a  temptation 
to  bluster  on  the  part  of  our  Presidents  and  Secretaries 
of  State,  more  particularly  when  an  election  was  pend- 

32 


OUR  FUTURE   FOREIGN  POLICY.  33 

ing.  Note  the  attitude  of  the  Senate  and  President 
Cleveland  on  the  fisheries  question.  The  treaty  was  re- 
jected by  the  Senate  to  make  party  capital,  and  then 
came  the  President's  retaliation  message,  which  was  pure 
buncombe.  Had  we  an  efficient  navy  when  an  ambitious 
Executive  was  seeking  re-election,  there  would  be  real 
danger  of  unnecessary  wars. 

Pub. — Is  it  not  inevitable  that  the  United  States  will 
some  day  take  its  place  among  the  nations  as  a  great 
power  in  international  questions  ?  We  still  pursue  the 
lines  of  foreign  policy  laid  down  by  Washington.  Yet 
how  changed  are  the  conditions  !  We  live  in  a  different 
era.  Potentially,  I  think,  we  are  the  greatest  power  on 
earth — actually,  one  of  the  weakest.  But  will  we  consent 
to  fill  this  humble  role  for  many  years  longer  ? 

Sir  O. — I  have  always  believed  that  some  President 
or  other  would  startle  the  nation  and  astonish  foreign 
powers  by  having  a  say  on  some  matter  of  international 
concern.  We  soon  shall  have  70,000,000  of  inhabitants, 
who  will  be  in  intimate  trade  relations  with  other  coun- 
tries. We  cannot  avoid  having  business  and  other  inter- 
ests which  would  justify  us  in  discussing  such  matters 
before  the  tribunal  of  great  nations. 

Pub. — What  do  you  think  will  be  the  occasion  of  a 
probable  new  departure  in  our  foreign  policy  ? 

Sir  O. — My  hope  has  been  that  our  first  attempt  at 
becoming  a  great  power  among  other  great  powers  would 
be  in  the  direction  of  international  conventions  unifying 
the  coinage  of  the  world,  adopting  some  universal  system 
of  weights  and  measures,  establishing  a  telegraphic  code 
or  maritime  rules.  I  have  thought  the  commercial  na- 
tions ought  to  own  the  ocean  cables  jointly  ;  for,  clearly, 
they  should  not  be  in  private  hands,  as  they  give  us  the 


34  GLIMPSES  OF  THE  FUTURE. 

quotations  of  all  the  markets  of  the  world.  But  there  is 
one  matter  which  is  destined  to  excite  a  great  deal  of  in- 
terest in  the  not  distant  future,  and  which  may  force  us 
out  of  the  isolation  which  has  marked  our  foreign  policy 
during  our  century  of  existence  as  a  nation. 

Pub. — And  that  is  ? 

Sir  O. — The  opening  of  the  Panama  Canal.  I  assume 
that  great  work  will  be  successfully  accomplished,  to  the 
lasting  credit  of  the  French  people  and  the  enduring 
fame  of  Count  Ferdinand  de  Lesseps.  Now,  for  obvious 
national  considerations,  this  very  commendable  enter- 
prise has  been  looked  on  with  jealous  eyes  by  the  Ameri- 
can people.  When  it  is  completed,  the  trade  between 
Western  Europe  and  Eastern  Asia  will  no  longer  pay 
tribute  to  the  transportation  system  of  the  United  States. 
Then  it  is  not  unlikely  that  foreign  powers  will  combine 
to  control  the  canal,  so  that  trade  would  not  be  inter- 
rupted in  case  of  war.  This  might  infringe  upon  the 
American  conception  of  the  Monroe  doctrine,  and  we 
might  be  forced  to  take  a  position  antagonistic  to  the 
great  powers  of  Europe.  If  by  that  time  we  have  an  ef- 
fective navy  and  reasonably  good  defences  for  our  sea- 
port cities,  we  might  run  the  risk  of  a  war  rather  than 
permit  the  Panama  Canal  to  remain  in  the  control  of 
powers  which  are  our  commercial  rivals.  We  are  not, 
however,  in  a  position  to  take  a  bold  stand,  nor  shall  we 
be  so  for  many  long  years,  for  although  we  have  the 
nucleus  of  a  navy,  we  have  no  guns  or  fortifications  to 
insure  safety  to  our  great  seaport  cities. 

Pub. — You  forget  the  possibilities  of  torpedo  systems. 
Then  there  is  the  new  dynamite  gun,  which  could  shat- 
ter a  mighty  iron-clad  to  pieces,  if  the  latter  only  got 
near  enough. 


OUR  FUTURE  FOREIGX  POLICY.  35 

Sir  O. — Yes,  if  it  only  got  near  enough.  But  so  far 
these  dynamite  charges  reach  only  short  distances,  and 
though  torpedoes  have  long  been  known  in  naval  war- 
fare I  fail  to  recall  a  single  instance  in  which  they  have 
done  material  damage.  They  may  be  more  successful  in 
the  future,  but  the  matter  is  too  important  to  be  left  to  a 
possibility  such  as  that. 

Pub. — You  think,  then,  that  when  this  Panama-Canal 
question  comes  up  there  is  likely  to  be  trouble  with  for- 
eign powers.  If  next  year  should  see  a  war  in  Europe, 
can  we  escape  being  mixed  up  with  it  in  some  way  ? 

Sir  O. — When  the  inevitable  conflict  begins  on  the 
Eastern  question  it  is  likely  to  create  a  conflagration  of 
war  that  will  involve  all  the  leading  nations  of  the  earth. 
My  impression  is  that  the  new  Emperor  William  of  Ger- 
many aspires  to  be  a  modern  Alexander  the  Great.  His 
appeals  to  the  army,  his  attention  to  military  details,  the 
changes  he  is  making  in  the  personnel  of  the  leaders  of 
his  troops,  his  sudden  calling  out  of  great  bodies  of  sol- 
diers to  test  their  discipline  and  readiness,  all  seem  to 
point  to  an  intention  on  his  part  to  lead  his  conquering 
Teutons  either  West  or  East.  He  may  turn  out  to  be  a 
Frederick  the  Great,  or  he  may  reproduce  the  idiosyn- 
crasies of  that  great  monarch's  father,  who  paid  a  great 
deal  of  attention  to  the  discipline  and  efficiency  of  his 
army,  but  avoided  war  persistently. 

Pub. — In  the  past,  these  military  monarchs  could  do 
very  much  as  they  pleased,  for  the  nations  were  com- 
posed mainly  of  nobles,  priests,  and  peasants.  The  bank- 
ing, manufacturing,  and  mercantile  classes  were  but 
poorly  represented,  and  had  no  status  in  the  courts  of  the 
warrior  kings  ;  but  the  great  bankers,  merchants,  manu- 
facturers, and  representatives  of  the  middle  class  are  now 


36  GLIMPSES  OF  THE  FUTURE. 

very  powerful.  Their  interests  are  best  subserved  by 
peace,  not  war.  Will  not  they  insist  that  no  unnecessary 
international  conflicts  shall  take  place  ? 

Sir  O. — I  confess  I  am  curious  to  note  the  attitude  of 
the  commercial  classes  during  the  next  great  war  in  Eu- 
rope. The  Semitic  element  is  very  powerful  in  trading 
circles.  It  is  not  averse  to  war,  for  the  daring  mercan- 
tile genius  of  the  Hebrew  utilizes  for  his  own  purposes 
these  international  conflicts.  He  delights  in  great  risks 
and  has  profited  by  all  modern  wars.  Our  civil  conflict 
added  very  greatly  to  the  wealth  of  the  Jewish  traders. 

Pub. — Still  I  judge  that  the  complex  civilization  of  our 
modern  era  is  the  foe  of  the  war  spirit.  The  German 
people  are  so  highly  educated  that  I  think  they  would 
become  restive  under  a  monarch  who  was  disposed  to 
enter  into  new  conflicts  merely  to  add  to  his  personal 
renown.  There  is  no  place  in  our  modern  world  for  the 
Louis  XIVs  or  the  Napoleons  of  the  past. 

SirO. — Yet  there  were  never  so  many  men  under  arms 
as  to-day.  The  treasure  spent  on  armaments  is  appalling, 
and  it  is  a  question  whether  the  fight  had  not  better  be- 
gin, so  that  some  one  power  could  become  dominant. 
Then  we  might  hope  to  see  a  forced  reduction  of  useless 
armaments. 

Pub. — But  to  return  to  our  own  country.  What  effect 
would  it  have  on  our  politics  were  the  American  people 
to  be  represented  in  the  council  of  nations  ? 

Sir  O. — It  would  at  once  raise  the  whole  tone  of  our 
political  discussions.  Our  politics  now  are  petty,  provin- 
cial, and  personal.  Read  the  English  press  and  note  the 
parliamentary  debates.  Mark  how  imperial  topics  come 
to  the  fore.  We  cannot  breed  a  race  of  great  statesmen 
until  we  have  our  say  in  international  matters.    We  shall 


OUR  FUTURE  FOREIGN  POLICY.  $J 

meet  with  some  unpleasant  surprises  when  we  desire  to 
take  our  place  among  the  nations  of  the  earth.  We  are 
not  only  without  colonies  and  distant  naval  stations,  but 
our  coasts  are  surrounded  with  a  cordon  of  fortifications 
in  the  hands  of  foreign  powers.  The  possession  of  the 
Bermuda  Islands  by  Great  Britain,  General  McClellan 
said,  was  worth  an  army  corps  to  the  Southern  Confede- 
rates. These  islands  were  the  head-quarters  for  the 
blockade  runners.  Havana  and  the  island  of  Cuba 
profited  greatly  by  the  contraband  trade  during  the  civil 
war.  When  we  wake  to  a  consciousness  of  our  own 
strength,  we  will  insist  on  the  possession  of  all  the  forti- 
fications near  our  coasts.  This  will  involve  the  annexa- 
tion of  many  of  the  West  India  islands. 

Pub. — You  believe,  I  think,  that  the  Dominion  of  Can- 
ada will  some  day  become  a  part  of  the  United  States. 
Will  this  come  about  peaceably  ? 

Sir  O. — I  fear  not  ;  there  is  every  human  reason  why 
this  dependency  of  Great  Britain  should  become  a  part 
of  our  Union,  but  the  unnatural  barriers  in  the  way  will 
probably  finally  be  broken  down  by  force. 


POSSIBILITIES    IN    THE    WAY    OF    PARTY 
ORGANIZATIONS. 


Voter.— What  is  there  to  be  said  respecting  the  histori- 
cal parties  of  the  country  ?  Will  the  present  divisions 
last  for  any  length  of  time  ?  Or  will  there  be  new  com- 
binations and  more  radical  and  far-reaching  pro- 
grammes ? 

Sir  Oracle. — Parties  in  all  free  governments  should 
represent — the  one,  order  ;  the  other,  progress.  There 
should  be  a  conservative  organization,  and  one  that  aims 
at  reform.  Political  parties  represent,  in  other  words, 
the  centripetal  and  centrifugal  forces  in  the  political 
world.  Hence  you  will  find  that  parties  are  apt  to  sepa- 
rate on  a  theory  as  to  the  functions  of  government  ; 
the  conservatives  holding  that  the  central  authority 
should  be  strong  and  capable  of  doing  many  things 
for  the  benefit  of  the  entire  community.  A  democratic 
party,  on  the  contrary,  favors  home  rule,  local  indepen- 
dence, and  individual  initiative.  The  distinctions  I  have 
made  will  account  for  the  Tory  in  England  and  the  Fed- 
erals and  Whigs  in  the  United  States,  both  of  which  have 
generally  been  the  parties  of  authority  and  order.  The 
English  Liberals  and  the  American  Democrats  have 
aimed  to  satisfy  the  aspirations  of  the  people  for  reform 
and  improvement. 

Voter. — Your  generalizations  are  interesting,  but  I 
33 


PARTY    ORGANIZATIONS.  39 

think  not  quite  accurate.  In  the  slavery  controversy 
the  Democratic  party  was  the  conservative  one,  and  bent 
all  its  energies  to  keep  the  black  men  enslaved. 

Sir  O. — History  is  full  of  such  inconsistencies.  The 
old  Democratic  party  was  the  foe  of  monopolies  ;  but  its 
States-right  notions  made  it  the  defender  of  slavery  as  it 
existed  under  State  laws.  But  the  Democratic  party  did 
all  it  could  to  make  every  adult  white  male  a  voter,  and 
it  favored  equal  rights  to  all  except  the  negro. 

Voter. — But  in  the  new  combinations  of  voters  will 
there  not  be  some  changes  ?  Will  there  not  be  other 
ideals  than  those  of  the  past  which  the  great  political  or- 
ganizations of  the  future  will  strive  to  follow 

Sir  O. — The  Democratic  party  of  the  future  will,  I 
think,  become  in  a  measure  socialistic.  If  it  aims  to 
placate  the  great  wage-receiving  class,  it  must  consent 
to  using  the  machinery  of  the  government  for  the  benefit 
of  the  mass  of  the  community.  This  is  the  aim  of  the 
social  democracy  of  Europe.  Kings,  nobles,  and  priests 
have  heretofore  made  use  of  the  powers  of  the  State  to 
further  their  interests,  and  the  progressive  reformers  will 
insist  that  hereafter  the  authority  of  the  general  govern- 
ment shall  be  so  wielded  as  to  advance  the  welfare  of 
the  bulk  of  the  people.  Common  schools,  public  roads, 
government  telegraphs,  State  control  of  railroads,  recre- 
ative parks,  State  and  municipal  sanitation, — all  these 
show  the  spread  of  State  socialism.  Indeed,  from  one 
point  of  view  tariff  legislation  is  socialistic.  It  aims  to 
create  conditions  favoring  the  establishment  of  industries 
beneficial  to  the  community. 

Voter. — Will  our  national  party  organizations  con- 
tinue to  live  into  the  twentieth  century  ?  That  is,  shall 
we  continue  to  hold  voluntary  national  conventions  to 


40  GLIMPSES   OF  THE  FUTURE. 

nominate  the  party  candidates  and  put  together  the  party- 
platforms  ? 

Sir  0. — Whatever  changes  will  be  effected  in  the 
direction  of  State  socialism  will  not,  I  think,  come 
through  national  party  action.  Our  country  is  so  large, 
and  national  party  organizations  will  represent  such  widely 
diversified  interests,  that  every  new  convention  which  sits 
will  find  it  more  and  more  difficult  to  agree  to  any  affir- 
mative propositions.  Hence  our  national  platforms  are 
vaguer  as  time  rolls  by.  The  average  politician  wants  to 
offend  no  one  ;  and  this  is  why  negative  Presidential 
candidates  and  "  dark  horses  "  take  the  place  of  really 
able  statesmen  in  our  quadrennial  contests. 

Voter. — If  we  abolished  the  electoral  college  and 
voted  directly  for  Presidential  candidates,  would  it  not 
give  a  chance  to  the  great  men  of  the  respective  parties 
to  become  Presidential  candidates  ? 

Sir  O. — It  is  very  certain  that  voting  by  States,  as  we 
do  now,  favors  mediocrity  at  the  expense  of  ability. 
Harrison  was  chosen  because  it  was  supposed  he  could 
carry  Indiana  ;  but  were  the  votes  of  a  party  counted 
without  respect  to  State  lines,  the  most  popular  leader 
would  be  selected  instead  of  a  "dark  horse." 

Voter. — Is  not  this  likely  to  be  done  some  day  ?  Will 
people  long  continue  to  tolerate  that  obsolete  institution, 
the  electoral  college  ? 

Sir  O. — Our  Constitution  is  so  difficult  to  change  that 
I  do  not  see  any  way  to  reform  it.  Our  fundamental  laws 
are  like  the  decrees  of  the  Medes  and  Persians — practi- 
cally unalterable.  This  is  one  of  the  greatest  perils  of 
the  country. 

Voter. — But  if  national  conventions  are  going  to  be 
afraid  of  reforms,  or  the  statement  even  of  general  pro- 


PARTY    ORGANIZATIONS.  4 1 

positions,  will  they  not  fall  into  disrepute  ?  The  mere 
selection  of  a  non-committal  candidate  will  hardly  fill  the 
bill.  The  American  people  will  get  tired  of  its  perfunc- 
tionary  political  machinery  if  its  action  becomes  so  com- 
monplace. 

Sir  O. — Undoubtedly  there  are  changes  in  our  party 
machinery  in  store  for  us  ;  but,  so  far,  our  great  national 
organizations  have  had  a  conservative  influence.  They 
have  sat  upon  all  the  cranky  notions  which  come  to  the 
front  so  frequently.  Voters  do  not  like  third  or  fourth 
parties.  They  do  not  care  to  support  tickets  which  have 
no  possible  chance  of  an  election. 

Voter. — Yet  the  anti-slavery  party  voted  for  candi- 
dates that  had  no  hope  of  election,  and  the  Prohibition- 
ists are  doing  the  same  to-day.  Had  there  been  no  anti- 
slavery  organization  there  would  have  been  no  Republi- 
can party,  and  if  the  Prohibitionists  are  very  strong  in  the 
coming  election  they  may  force  the  Republicans  to  adopt 
their  cardinal  principles  in  1892. 

Sir.  O. — Perhaps.  Still,  despite  the  examples  you 
have  mentioned,  it  is  difficult  to  organize  a  party  which 
exists  for  the  sake  of  standing  up  and  being  counted. 
The  mass  of  average  voters  prefer  to  act  with  parties  that 
either  will  win  or  come  very  near  doing  so.  As  I  have 
said,  when  the  country  becomes  larger  and  more  populous, 
the  more  difficult  will  it  be  to  effect  radical  reform.  And 
the  danger  to  our  political  institutions  is  stagnation  rather 
than  too  great  recklessness  in  reformatory  legislation. 

Voter. — But  what  I  want  to  get  at  is  the  probable 
changes  in  the  machinery  of  our  election  systems.  Will 
the  political  "  boss  "  have  so  much  to  say  in  the  future  as 
in  the  past  of  our  politics  ? 

Sir  0. — I    should   judge   that   as   our   country  grows 


42  GLIMPSES  OF  THE  FUTURE. 

larger  the  local,  State,  and  national  "  boss  "  or  leader 
would  become  more  influential.  It  is  an  idle  dream  to 
suppose  that  the  units  which  compose  political  organiza- 
tions can  act  together  without  leadership.  It  is  not 
"bosses"  which  are  objectionable.  We  cannot  get 
along  without  them.  The  only  choice  we  have  is  between 
wise  "  bosses  "  and  bad  ones.  What  we  require  in  war, 
industry,  and  politics  are  leaders  who  can  lead  and  fol- 
lowers who  can  follow.  Now,  I  do  not  know  or  care 
whether  our  convention  system — local  or  national — will 
last  through  the  twentieth  century,  but  I  am  as  certain 
as  I  live  that  if  we  expect  to  escape  chaos  we  must  follow 
recognized  leaders.  So  far,  the  very  life  of  our  political 
parties  depended  upon  men  like  the  late  Thurlow  Weed 
and  Dean  Richmond,  who,  not  holding  office  themselves, 
dictated  the  course  and  the  candidates  of  their  parties. 
Such  leaders  are  inevitable  ;  but  they  should  never  be 
candidates  for  office  themselves. 


RELIGIOUS  CHANGES  OF  THE  FUTURE. 


Churchman. — What  is  there  to  be  said  touching  the 
tendencies  of  religious  thought  ?  I  assume  that  man 
is  a  religious  animal  ;  and  that  he  will  always  worship 
something,  as  well  as  hold  to  a  body  of  opinions  which 
may  be  called  his  creed.  But  what  direction  is  the 
drift  of  religious  discussion  taking  ? 

Sir  Oracle. — Judged  by  their  ability,  and  the  influ- 
ences they  are  exerting  in  the  world  of  thought,  it  looks 
as  though  the  philosophers  who  did  not  believe  in  any 
religious  creed  were  pretty  sure  to  be  the  most  heard  from 
in  the  future.  But  I,  for  my  part,  agree  with  you  that 
man  is  naturally  religious,  and  that  if  he  gets  rid  of  one 
faith,  it  is  only  to  take  up  another. 

Churchman. — I  noticed  from  some  statistics  recently 
published  about  the  religious  sects  of  New  York  City, 
that  since  1872  the  population  has  increased  at  the  rate 
of  fifeeen  per  cent,  per  annum,  while  the  church  mem- 
bers in  the  meantime  increased  at  the  rate  of  only  thirteen 
per  cent,  per  annum.  Then  the  Episcopalian  body  had 
added  to  its  numbers  more  than  any  three  of  the  other 
Protestant  sects. 

Sir  O. — In  a  number  of  the  North  American  Review, 
published  in  1876,  there  was  an  article  summarizing  the 
history  of  the  various  sects  during  the  previous  century, 
which  seemed  to  me  very  significant,      At  the  close  of 

43 


44  GLIMPSES  OF  THE  FUTURE. 

the  revolutionary  war,  the  Congregationalists  were  the 
dominant  Christian  sect.  The  form  of  their  church 
government  was  democratic  ;  their  creed  was  of  the 
sternest  school  of  Calvinism.  The  Catholic  Church  then 
had  few  adherents  ;  and  the  Episcopalians  were  under  a 
cloud,  because  before  and  during  the  war  it  was  the 
church  of  the  Tories.  Neither  the  Methodists  nor  the 
Baptists  were  then  of  much  account  numerically  or 
otherwise.  The  changes  in  the  religious  thought  of  the 
nation  in  the  hundred  years  were  very  notable.  The 
Congregationalists,  instead  of  being  the  first  in  num- 
bers, were  the  seventh.  Calvinism,  once  the  dominant 
creed,  is  now  discredited  even  by  the  Congregationalists 
themselves.  The  ritualistic  sects,  such  as  the  Roman 
Catholics  and  the  Episcopalians,  have  thriven  and  are 
thriving  wonderfully.  So  also  have  the  emotional  sects, 
such  as  the  Methodists  and  Baptists.  Liberal  Christian- 
ity, so  called,  unknown  a  century  ago,  has  powerfully 
affected  the  religious  thought  of  our  time.  Hence  the 
change  has  been  from  stern  dogma  to  a  certain  laxity  in 
creed.  Ritualism  and  emotionalism  have  grown  at  the 
expense  of  doctrine  ;  while  a  hierarchy  and  a  federative 
system,  such  as  the  Presbyterian  synods,  have  taken  the 
place  of  the  republican  home-rule  church  governments, 
which  obtained  at  the  beginning  of  our  nation's  history. 

Churchman. — That  is  a  very  interesting  summary  of 
the  drift  of  religious  opinion  in  the  past.  Now  what  of 
the  future  ?  Is  religion  to  be  discredited  by  the  specu- 
lative scientists  and  philosophers  of  the  day,  or  is  there 
to  be  a  renaissance  of  faith  ? 

Sir  O. — I  fear  that  well-informed  men  everywhere  are 
now  unbelievers  in  the  creeds  of  Christendom.  People 
now  affect  the  emotional  sects  or  the  Episcopalians,  be- 


RELIGIOUS  CHANGES  IN  THE  FUTURE.        45 

cause  they  are  not  asked  to  subscribe  to  the  dogmas 
which  were  firmly  believed  one  hundred  years  ago. 
Churches  are  now  social  centres  quite  as  much  as  places 
of  worship.  People  go  to  church  to  hear  the  music,  to 
take  part  in  the  liturgy,  or  to  listen  to  an  eloquent  dis- 
course. A  minister  who  dwelt  continually  on  the  old 
doctrines,  especially  that  of  hell-fire,  would  soon  be 
preaching  to  empty  benches. 

Churchman. — So  you  think  the  generations  to  come 
will  be  what  we  call  infidels  ? 

Sir  O. — Oh,  no  !  Active  unbelief  is  never  long-lived. 
Man  must  have  a  theory  of  the  universe,  which  is  in 
itself  a  creed  ;  he  must  also  have  some  ethical  standards. 
The  trouble  with  the  Christian  creed  is,  that  it  is  an  an- 
tiquated one.  It  was  formulated  when  men  were  ignorant 
of  the  facts  of  nature.  There  is  no  reconciliation  pos- 
sible between  it  and  the  latest  results  of  modern  thought 
and  science.  Nevertheless,  man  is  a  religious  and  a  be- 
lieving animal.  He  will,  as  I  have  said,  have  his  theory 
of  the  universe  and  his  system  of  morals.  It  is  for  the 
future  to  determine  what  these  will  be.  In  the  meantime, 
I  think  that  men  will  satisfy  their  emotional  cravings  by 
art — that  is  by  music,  eloquence,  and  church  ritual.  The 
sense  of  mystery  will  be  appealed  to  more  than  it  has 
been. 

Churchman. — What  are  the  striking  features  in  the 
present  religious  movements  of  the  world  ? 

Sir  O. — Mohammedanism  is  making  wonderful  prog- 
ress in  Africa,  and  is  doing  excellent  work.  Even- 
Mussulman  mosque  and  village  not  only  establishes  a 
fervent  faith,  but  checks  debauchery,  and  puts  a  stop  to 
the  ravages  of  the  liquor  traffic.  Christian  missionaries 
have,  relatively,  little  success.     The  faith  they  teach  is 


46  GLIMPSES  OF  THE  FUTURE. 

too  metaphysical  for  savage  or  semi-civilized  people. 
Then  the  Christian  missionary  is  generally  accompanied 
by  the  dealer  in  fire-arms  and  bad  spirits.  The  torrents 
of  liquor  poured  into  Africa  by  Germany  and  Great 
Britain  is  a  scandal  to  all  Christendom.  It  seems  that 
in  British  India  the  Mohammedans  make  twenty  converts 
where  the  Christians  make  one.  I  judge,  however,  that 
the  spread  of  modern  knowledge  is  discrediting  all  the 
creeds  that  have  come  down  to  us  from  the  past.  I  do 
not  pretend  to  be  able  to  give  even  the  vaguest  guess  as 
to  the  religious  faith  of  the  future.  I  see,  however,  very 
clearly  that  what  we  vaguely  call  Liberalism  is  under- 
mining the  old  established  creeds  of  the  civilized  world. 

Churchman. — What  will  be  the  effect  on  the  morals 
of  mankind  of  this  dying  out  of  the  old  faiths  ? 

Sir  O. — I  confess  to  feeling  gloomy  at  times  in  view 
of  the  lessons  taught  by  history.  It  will  be  noticed  that 
the  decay  of  civilization  in  the  empires  of  the  past  began 
soon  after  the  religious  faith,  which  was  the  heart  of  the 
civilization,  had  died  out.  When  the  Grecian  no  longer 
believed  in  Zeus,  Apollo,  Aphrodite,  and  the  Delphic  ora- 
cles, the  spread  of  civilization  in  that  peninsula  was  at  an 
end.  When  the  Roman  augurs  laughed  in  each  other's 
faces,  Roman  civilization  was  doomed.  Can  it  be,  I  often 
ask  myself,  that  we  are  again  to  be  plunged  into  what 
may  be  called  a  "  dark  age,"  because  the  Christian  faith 
is  discredited  throughout  the  thinking  world  ?  Must 
our  civilization  become  eclipsed,  as  that  of  the  Assyri- 
ans, Babylonians,  Egyptians,  Greeks,  and  Romans  was  ? 

Churchman. — The  analogy  between  the  past  and  our 
era  seems  to  me  overdrawn.  But  to  our  question. 
Surely  you  have  some  theory  as  to  the  course  of  religious 
thought,  say  for  the  next  quarter  of  a  century.     If  it  is  too 


RELIGIOUS   CHANGES  IN  THE  FUTURE.         47 

much  to  ask  you  to  outline  the  faith  of  the  future,  you 
can  at  least  try  to  tell  us  what  will  be  the  drift  of  religious 
opinions. 

Sir  O. — It  is  very  clear,  I  think,  that  the  lines  of  de- 
marcation among  the  various  Christian  sects  are  being 
broken  down.  The  philosophers  of  the  day  have  been 
discrediting  the  fundamental  doctrines  of  orthodox 
Christianity.  Doubts  are  expressed  as  to  the  existence 
of  God  and  the  possibility  of  a  future  state.  In  presence 
of  this  dangerous  enemy  the  various  Christian  sects  have 
been  forced  to  unite.  Then,  I  think,  in  all  countries 
there  is  a  tendency  towards  a  blending  of  diverse  creeds. 
There  were,  for  instance,  in  China  three  distinct  re- 
ligions. First  there  was  Confucianism,  which  was  a 
secular  creed  ;  then  there  was  Tao-ism,  a  highly  spirit- 
ualistic faith  ;  and  finally  Buddhism.  The  boundaries 
between  each  were  at  one  time  very  definitely  drawn  ; 
but  the  Chinaman  of  to-day  has  a  composite  religion, 
made  up  of  the  three  types  mentioned  above.  We  have 
seen  in  this  country  how  Unitarianism  has  modified 
Presbyterianism,  and  how  the  Universalists,  without 
increasing  their  own  numbers,  have  succeeded  in  mod- 
erating the  emphasis  put  upon  hell-fire  by  the  more 
orthodox  sects.  In  the  churches  of  the  twentieth  cen- 
tury fewer  sects  will  be  represented  ;  creeds  will  be  dis- 
credited ;  and  art  will  be  appealed  to  as  an  object  of 
devotional  feeling.  I  look  for  fewer  sects,  more  union 
among  Christians,  and  a  gradual  dying  out  of  dogma. 
If  we  are  to  have  a  new  modern  creed,  it  will  be  in 
unison  with  the  latest  results  of  scientific  thought  and 
investigation. 


THE  RELATION  OF  THE  SEXES. 


Social  Reformer. — Since  man  emerged  from  the 
savage  state  he  has  been  testing  all  possible  forms 
of  the  sexual  relation.  There  is  not,  I  believe,  in  any 
language  an  exhaustive  history  of  marriage, — under  that 
term  including  every  possible  variation  in  the  intimate 
relations  of  men  and  women  ;  but  we  all  know,  in  a  gen- 
eral way,  the  leading  types  of  marriage.  The  primitive 
man  was  the  original  free-lover.  He  did  as  the  animals 
around  him  did — that  is,  he  fought  for  the  possession  of 
the  female  ;  and  in  regions  where  food  was  easily  pro- 
cured he  took  no  care  of  his  own  offspring.  Then  came 
polyandry,  in  which  one  woman  was  the  wife  of  two  or 
more  men.  This  form  of  marriage  probably  had  its 
origin  in  regions  where  the  struggle  for  life  was  most 
difficult.  In  the  "  survival  of  the  fittest  "  it  was  the  war- 
like male  rather  than  the  timid  female  who  was  best  able 
to  overcome  the  unfavorable  environment  ;  hence  too 
arose  the  practice  of  female  infanticide,  which  survives 
to  our  own  day  in  many  parts  of  Eastern  Asia.  Monog- 
amy is  the  type  of  marriage  which  made  its  appearance 
in  the  more  advanced  nations  ;  but  it  was  preceded  by 
polygamy,  in  which  more  than  one  woman  was  the  wife 
or  concubine  of  one  man.  This  last  has  been  the  favorite 
type  of  marriage  the  world  over.  It  has  prevailed  in  all 
climates  among  every  known  race  of  human  beings  ;  and 

48 


THE  KELA  TION  OF  THE   SEXES.  49 

undoubtedly  there  must  be  some  physiological  reasons 
which  account  for  the  popularity  of  polygamy  among 
the  races  of  the  earth.  Our  present  inquiry  is,  What 
type  of  marriage  is  most  likely  to  survive  among  the 
advanced  nations  of  the  world  ? 

Sir  Oracle. — The  question  is  a  delicate  one,  and  its 
discussion  is  likely  to  engender  fierce  animosities.  The 
future  type  of  marriage  is  a  real  enigma.  I  doubt,  my- 
self, if  monogamy  is  the  last  word  on  that  vital  matter. 
You  say  that  polygamy  has  probably  a  physiological 
foundation,  by  which  you  mean,  of  course,  that  it  is 
more  in  accordance  with  the  nature  of  things  that  one 
man  should  have  several  wives,  rather  than  that  one 
woman  should  have  several  husbands,  or  that  one  woman 
should  be  confined  to  one  man.  It  is  urged  by  the  Mor- 
mons, as  well  as  by  other  polygamous  peoples,  that  the 
child-bearing  woman  should  be  relieved  from  the  atten- 
tions of  her  husband  from  the  beginning  of  gestation  to 
the  end  of  lactation, — a  period  covering  nearly  two 
years.  But  this  continence  would  be  unnatural  to  the 
male.  His  passions  call  for  gratification,  as  a  rule,  at 
least  monthly  ;  hence  polygamy,  or  that  other  institution, 
— deemed  so  immoral, — prostitution,  which,  I  take  it,  is 
simply  polyandry  adapted  to  conditions  existing  in  all 
monogamic  communities. 

S.  R. — Our  inquiry,  as  I  understand  it,  is  not  what 
the  true  type  of  marriage  should  be,  but  what  is  the 
drift  of  things  sexual  ?  What  changes  are  likely  to  take 
place  in  that  institution  by  the  close  of  the  next  cen- 
tury ? 

Sir  O. — It  would  not  be  wise  to  pronounce  definitely 
as  to  what  the  true  relations  of  the  sexes  should  be. 
That  is  a  matter  for  science  finally  to  determine.     Man 


50  GLIMPSES  OF  THE  FUTURE. 

has  been  accumulating  experiences  through  all  history 
bearing  on  that  vital  matter.  We  know,  in  a  general 
way,  that  polyandry  was  an  improvement  on  promiscu- 
ity, that  polygamy  was  a  great  advance  over  polyandry, 
and  that  monogamy  has  been  the  type  of  marriage  which 
has  accompanied  the  highest  civilization  so  far  as  known. 
It  was  undoubtedly  one  of  the  secrets  of  the  success  of 
ancient  Rome.  It  gave  birth  to  the  family  virtues, 
which  made  the  Romans  superior  to  other  peoples  in 
their  epoch. 

S.  R. — If  that  is  true,  the  question  would  seem  to  be 
settled  as  to  the  future  of  marriage.  Monogamy  must 
in  time  be  the  prevailing  type  throughout  the  world. 

Sir  O. — Not  so  fast,  please.  I  did  not  say  but  what 
some  variation  of  monogamy  might  not  be  the  final  re- 
sult of  historic  tendencies  and  scientific  conclusions. 
We  know,  in  a  general  way,  that  the  monogamic  marriage 
tie  is  tending  to  become  looser  throughout  Christendom. 
Marriage  was  once  regarded  as  a  sacrament,  which  could 
be  dissolved  only  by  the  adultery  of  the  wife  ;  but  it  is 
curious  to  notice  that  religious  revolts  have  generally 
been  accompanied  by  a  weakening  of  the  religious  and 
social  sanctions  to  marriage.  Martin  Luther  himself 
married  a  nun  ;  and  condoned,  if  he  did  not  sanction, 
practical  polygamy  among  the  German  princes.  The 
Anabaptist  fanaticism  was  characterized  by  wild  sexual 
excesses.  The  immediate  cause  of  the  establishment  of 
the  Church  of  England  was  the  desire  of  Henry  VIII. 
to  divorce  one  woman  and  marry  another.  But,  of 
course,  there  were  other  factors  in  bringing  about  the  En- 
glish Reformation.  All  our  loose  divorce  laws  date  from 
the  Protestant  revolt  against  Rome.  Marriage  is  no 
longer  a  religious  rite  even  in  Catholic  countries,  but  a 


THE  RELA  TION  OF  THE   SEXES.  5  I 

civil  contract,  and  the  logical  result  would  seem  to  be  a 
state  of  public  opinion  which  would  justify  a  change  of 
partners  whenever  the  contracting  couple  mutually- 
agreed  to  separate. 

S.  R. — Surely  that  is  not  a  desirable  outlook.  What 
becomes  of  the  family  ?  and  how  are  children  to  be 
maintained  if  we  return  to  what  would,  in  reality,  be 
promiscuity  ? 

Sir  O. — I  am  not  describing  what  ought  to  be,  but  am 
trying  to  point  out  that,  as  a  matter  of  fact,  modern 
Christendom,  monogamic  though  it  calls  itself,  really 
recognizes  all  pre-existing  forms  of  the  relation  of  the 
sexes.  The  more  moral  part  of  the  community,  of 
course,  accept  the  conventional  monogamic  marriage. 
Happily,  so  far,  this  type  of  the  sexual  relation  is  loyally 
recognized  by  the  great  bulk  of  civilized  peoples.  But 
we  have  promiscuity,  polyandry,  and  polygamy  right 
here  in  New  York.  Those  who  practise  these,  to  us,  ob- 
jectionable forms  of  the  sexual  relation,  are  under  a  so- 
cial ban  ;  but  the  demi-monde  is,  after  all,  a  real  world, 
in  which  hundreds  of  thousands  of  civilized  men  and 
women  live  in  all  the  great  capitals  of  Christendom.  I 
will  not  vouch  for  the  exact  figures  ;  but  it  is  alleged 
that  in  all  monogamic  communities  one  woman  in  every 
sixty,  lives  openly  or  secretly,  an  irregular  sexual  life. 
The  cause  of  this  may  be  poverty,  or  it  may  be  passion  ; 
but  we  know  that  with  certain  females,  as  with  many 
males,  there  is  an  instinct  for  change  of  partners  which 
will  be  gratified.  Happily  these  types  of  women  are 
not  common,  but  they  exist  nevertheless,  as  the  many 
forms  of  the  "  social  evil "  attest.  You  know  some  of 
the  French  social  theorists  call  this  \.\\t papillon  (butter- 
fly) variety  of  women. 


52  GLIMPSES  OF  THE  FUTURE. 

S.  R. — Let  us  stick  to  our  text.  What  changes  do  you 
look  forward  to  in  the  prevailing  type  of  marriage  ? 

Sir  O. — I  confess  to  being  gravely  disquieted  at  the 
outlook.  The  drift  of  things  since  the  Protestant  Ref- 
ormation has  certainly  been  towards  a  loosening  of 
social  ties.  In  moral  New  England,  one  in  every  twelve 
marriages  is  openly  dissolved.  There  must  of  course  be 
a  large  percentage  of  cases  in  which  husbands  and 
wives  are  not  faithful  to  one  another,  but  who  live  to- 
gether for  the  sake  of  their  children,  or  in  deference  to 
social  conventions.  The  wife  being  dependent  is  forced  to 
condone  irregularities  on  the  part  of  her  husband.  If 
unfaithfulness  was  promptly  followed  by  divorce,  what 
an  appalling  state  of  things  would  be  disclosed  !  I  con- 
fess my  gorge  rises  when  I  read  the  platforms  ot  the 
party  organizations  respecting  polygamy  in  Utah.  Then 
look  at  that  monstrous  Edmunds  Bill,  confiscating  the 
Mormon  Church  property.  Polygamy  as  practised  in 
Utah  is  a  marriage  institution  sanctioned  in  nearly  all 
ages  and  countries.  What  business  have  we  to  set  up  a 
social  standard  for  others  in  the  relation  of  the  sexes 
when  our  own  is  practically  so  low  ? 

S.  R. — But  are  there  no  agencies  at  work  to  maintain 
the  sanctity  of  the  marriage  relation  and  keep  up  our 
family  life  ? 

Sir  O. — It  seems  to  me  that  our  modern  methods  of 
living  rather  tend  to  break  up  the  family.  Women  are 
largely  beginning  to  support  themselves  ;  they  are  being 
educated  with  that  view.  Those  who  enter  a  lucrative 
calling  do  not  care  to  be  the  wives  of  men  who  cannot 
keep  up  the  standard  of  comfort  they  have  set  for  them- 
selves. Hence  there  are  great  classes  of  women  begin- 
ning  to    take   part    in    our    modern    life   who   are   not 


THE  RELATION  OF  THE   SEXES.  53 

dependent  on  the  other  sex,  but  who  yet  have  the 
passions  and  affections  common  to  the  race.  Our  new 
modes  of  living  are  not  such  as  conduce  to  the  integrity 
of  family  life.  The  poor  man  and  woman  in  the  tene- 
ment house,  and  the  rich  man  and  wife  in  the  great  flat, 
are  thrown  into  relations  with  other  men  and  women  of 
their  several  classes,  which  encourages  intimacies  not 
possible  in  the  old  isolated  home.  Look  at  the  hotel  life, 
which  is  so  marked  a  feature  of  our  modern  way  of  liv- 
ing. Then  this  is  a  travelling  age  ;  men  and  women  are 
changing,  season  by  season,  their  local  habitations.  The 
public  opinion  of  their  environment  is  not  the  same  as 
when  surrounded  by  their  family  and  friends.  Both 
husbands  and  wives  are  separated  oftener  and  for  longer 
intervals  than  was  the  case  before  this  age  of  swift  and 
cheap  steam  travel.  They  carry  their  passions  with 
them  wherever  they  go,  and  are  under  less  restraint  than 
when  their  home  life  was  more  permanent. 

S.  R. — From  what  you  say  it  would  appear  as  if  sexual 
chaos  was  just  ahead  of  us. 

Sir  O. — After  all,  I  judge  that  the  majority  of  men 
and  women  will  continue  to  be  faithful  wives  and  hus- 
bands ;  but  I  fear  public  opinion  will  hereafter  tend  to 
tolerate  irregular  types  of  the  sexual  relation.  Time  was 
when  a  divorced  man  or  woman  was  looked  upon  with 
disfavor,  and  they  were  discountenanced  by  respectable 
people.  This  is  so  no  longer.  I  think  there  is  a  dis- 
position not  to  inquire  too  curiously  into  the  private  lives 
of  the  men  and  women  we  meet  every  day.  If  they  re- 
spect the  ordinary  conventions,  not  much  more  is  asked 
of  them.  Some  day  science  will  take  up  this  question  of 
the  relation  of  the  sexes.  What  its  final  verdict  will  be, 
no  one  can  now  foresee.     I  am,  however,  myself  satisfied 


54  GLIMPSES  OF  THE  FUTURE. 

that  the  science-crowned  type  of  marriage  will  be  mono- 
gamic.  It  will  be  the  devotion  of  one  man  to  one 
woman  ;  and  it  will  be  a  permanent  institution.  A  man 
and  woman  live  together  ;  a  child  is  born  which  requires 
the  care  of  both  father  and  mother  until  it  reaches 
womanhood  or  manhood.  In  the  meantime  other  chil- 
dren are  born,  who  must  also  be  cared  for  by  both 
parents.  Clearly  under  this  natural  order  of  things 
there  is  no  chance  for  divorces  or  marital  unfaithfulness 
without  the  direst  consequences  to  the  family.  Monog- 
amy, therefore,  has  a  basis  in  the  nature  of  things  ;  but 
the  question  is  whether  that  institution  satisfies  all  the 
complex  relations  of  humanity.  In  other  words,  will  not 
both  polyandry  and  polygamy  be  tolerated  in  the  future 
history  of  the  race  ?  The  verdict  must  be  given  by 
science,  and  affirmed  or  denied  by  our  posterity. 


IMPROVING  THE  RACE. 


Social  Reformer. — Marriage  has  results  other  than 
those  affecting  the  man  and  woman  who  enter  into 
the  conjugal  relation.  It  usually  involves  offspring.  In- 
deed, apart  from  the  satisfaction  to  the  individual,  the 
aim  of  marriage  is  the  perpetuation  of  the  race.  Now  it 
is  patent  that  in  all  the  marriages  of  the  past  there  has 
been  no  conscious  effort  on  the  part  of  men  and  women 
to  improve  the  human  race  physically,  mentally,  or 
morally.  A  woman  is  sought  for  in  marriage  because 
she  strikes  the  fancy  of  some  man.  He  never  inquires 
into  her  pedigree,  nor  does  he  concern  himself  what  kind 
of  children  she  may  bear.  A  woman  in  accepting  a 
suitor  does  so  because  he  is  agreeable  to  her  and  can 
support  her  comfortably.  It  never  occurs  to  her  to  in- 
quire if  there  was  insanity  or  disease  among  her  proposed 
husband's  ancestors.  Now  in  the  loosening  of  the  mar- 
riage tie,  which  you  think  is  in  store  for  us  in  the  future, 
what  are  we  to  expect  in  the  way  of  offspring  ?  Will  any 
effort  be  made  to  improve  the  breed  of  human  beings  ? 
How  will  the  mental  and  physical  health  of  the  future 
man  compare  with  the  man  of  to-day  ? 

Sir  Oracle. — It  would  take  volumes  to  properly  an- 
swer your  queries.  I  can  give  you  only  a  few  desultory 
guesses  ;  and  in  discussing  this  matter  I  am  very  likely 
to  tell  you  what  ought  to  be  rather  than  what  will  be, 

55 


56  GLIMPSES   OF  THE  FUTURE. 

We  all  have  our  theories  as  to  what  society  should  do  ; 
but  then,  somehow,  the  mass  of  mankind  follow  their 
instincts  or  the  tendency  of  things  without  reference  to 
moral  considerations.  My  hope  is  that  what  we  call 
science — that  is,  the  organized  common-sense  or  experi- 
ence of  mankind — will  eventually  be  brought  to  bear  upon 
the  problem  of  the  continuation  of  man's  life  on  this 
planet.  Science  has  been  dealing  with  the  inorganic 
world,  and  with  the  most  surprisingly  valuable  results, 
as  witness  astronomy,  physics,  chemistry,  and  mechani- 
cal invention,  such  as  steam,  electricity,  and  the  telephone. 
But  of  late  years  the  scientific  method  has  been  applied 
to  the  organic  world — that  is,  to  biology,  including  under 
that  term  the  phenomena  connected  with  the  life  of  man, 
individual  and  social.  Science  has  not  travelled  far  in 
this  direction,  but  surprising  as  have  been  its  discoveries 
in  the  inorganic  world,  they  will  be  as  nothing  compared 
to  what  we  may  expect  when  man  and  society  will  be 
acted  upon  and  modified  by  the  social  scientists  of  the 
future. 

S.  R. — All  that  is  rather  vague.     Our  present  problem 
is,  What  is  likely  to  occur  in  the  next  century  ? 

Sir  O. — I  am  afraid  that  little  or  nothing  will  be  done 
in  the  way  of  stirpiculture — that  is,  the  improvement  of 
the  race  as  a  race.  Man,  by  his  forethought  and  care, 
has  made  marvellous  improvements  in  the  flora  and  fauna 
under  his  control.  Take  the  case  of  the  domestic  ani- 
mals. Compare  the  great  variety  of  useful  and  beautiful 
dogs  with  their  wolfish  progenitors.  See  what  man  has 
done  with  horses,  sheep,  and  other  cattle  which  minister  ' 
to  his  wants.  Every  one  realizes  that  the  same  methods 
applied  to  the  human  race  would  give  the  best  possible 
results ;  but  as  yet  no  one  even  dares  to  discuss  this 


IMPROVING  THE  RACE.  $7 

delicate  and  vital  matter.  It  does  seem  to  me,  however, 
that  the  time  has  come  when  society  for  its  own  protec- 
tion should  forbid  conjugal  unions  that  are  likely  to 
result  in  criminal,  insane,  or  diseased  offspring.  This 
would  make  the  physician  instead  of  the  clergyman  the 
proper  official  to  sanction  a  marriage.  What  a  mockery 
it  is  when  the  priest  asks  the  blessing  of  God  upon 
a  union  that  is  certain  to  result  in  adding  people  to  the 
world  whose  life  is  a  misery  to  themselves  and  to  others. 
We  are  only  beginning  to  study  heredity.  It  is  a  vast 
and  fruitful  field,  and  offers  an  opening  for  specialists, 
who  may  do  much  to  help  improve  the  man  and  woman 
of  the  future. 

S.  R. — But  is  it  not  true  that  without  any  spe- 
cial efforts  there  is  a  tendency  in  the  race  to  im- 
prove itself.  Sexual  selection  involves  choice.  The 
desirable  man  has  his  pick  among  the  girls  of  his  ac- 
quaintance. He  naturally  chooses  the  prettiest  and  the 
most  vivacious.  Good  looks  and  high  spirits  are  rarely 
the  accompaniments  of  an  organism  predisposed  to 
disease.  It  has  been  noted  that  the  modern  man  and 
woman  show  an  improvement  over  their  forefathers,  be- 
cause they  are  better  fed  ;  and  their  hours  of  toil  have 
been  reduced.  Then  is  it  not  true  that  the  length  of 
human  life  has  been  increased  within  the  last  century, 
due  to  better  physical  conditions,  and  the  removal  of 
causes  which  shorten  life  ?  The  war  on  the  diseases  that 
come  from  impure  air  and  foul  water  is  ridding  the 
world  of  the  plagues  and  fevers  which  formerly  decimated 
mankind. 

Sir  O. — There  is,  however,  another  side  to  that  ques- 
tion. Human  beings  are  now  kept  alive,  who  formerly 
perished  because  of  their  weakness  and  liability  to  fatal 


58  GLIMPSES  OF  THE   FUTURE. 

diseases.  I  fear  we  have  added  to  the  length  of  life, 
while  really  lowering  the  average  vitality.  That  is  to  say, 
feeble  organisms,  which  would  have  perished  under  the 
old  order  of  things,  are  kept  alive,  and  continue  their 
kind.  Indeed  I  have  often  suspected  that  the  over- 
running of  the  ancient  Roman  world  by  the  barbarians 
was  largely  due  to  the  superior  vitality  and  virility  of  the 
latter.  In  the  struggle  for  life,  only  the  strong  survived  ; 
whereas,  in  the  civilized  communities  of  the  ancient 
world,  luxury  undermined  the  strength  of  the  mass  of  the 
community  ;  and  the  more  civilized  conditions  kept  alive 
the  weaklings,  who  had  not  the  strength  to  contend  suc- 
cessfully against  the  vigorous  barbarians. 

S.  R. — Our  conversation  is  getting  rather  discursive. 
Let  us  stick  to  our  text.  What  has  the  future  in  store 
for  us  in  the  way  of  offspring  ?  Will  they  be  better  or 
worse  than  those  of  the  present  generation  ? 

Sir  O. — If  there  is  any  value  in  my  forecast  that  prac- 
tically there  will  be  several  types  of  marriage  recognized 
by  the  civilized  world  of  the  future,  it  follows,  I  fear, 
that  the  superior  classes  will  have  fewer  children  than 
they  have  now.  As  a  general  thing  people  who  are  cul- 
tivated and  wealthy  have  small  families.  In  the  world 
of  man  as  in  the  world  of  nature,  it  is  the  inferior  types 
which  propagate  most  freely.  "  111  weeds  thrive  apace," 
says  the  proverb.  It  requires  care  to  bring  into  being  a 
beautiful  and  fragrant  flower  ;  but  the  utmost  vigilance 
cannot  prevent  the  propagation  of  the  thistle  and  other 
weeds.  People  who  have  been  bred  in  colleges,  and  live 
in  costly  houses  have  very  few  children  ;  but  see  how 
the  latter  swarm  around  the  tenement  house,  where  the 
conditions  of  life  are  so  unfavorable.  How  to  civilize 
and  humanize  this   mass  of   children   born    under   the 


IMPROVING  THE  RACE.  59 

most  unfavorable  conditions,  is  the  great  problem  for  the 
sociologists. 

S.  R. — There  is  an  offset  to  this  undue  multiplication 
of  undesirable  offspring.  The  well-born  child  lives  and 
thrives,  while  the  human  weeds  are  cut  down.  Note  the 
terrible  mortality  of  children  born  in  tenement  houses. 
Great  cities  consume  human  life  ;  that  is,  there  are  more 
die  than  are  born  there.  Those  who  survive  are  the  well- 
born, or  the  comers  from  the  country. 

Sir  O. — There  is  one  feature  in  the  life  of  Continental 
Europe  which  is  improving  the  race  in  a  way  little  sus- 
pected. The  universal  military  conscription  is  adding 
wonderfully  to  the  vitality  of  the  races  subject  to  it. 
About  all  of  the  young  men  of  the  Continent  have  to 
serve  from  three  to  five  years  in  the  army.  They  are 
wholesomely  fed,  kept  much  in  the  open  air,  are  forced 
to  take  gymnastic  exercises,  and  to  submit  to  a  drill  and 
discipline,  all  of  which  adds  to  their  bodily  vigor.  The 
people  of  the  British  Islands  have  no  such  training  ;  and 
that  is  why,  in  the  next  great  war,  the  British  troops  will 
be  at  a  disadvantage  in  fighting  either  the  French  or  the 
Germans.  If  the  young  women  of  the  Continent  had  the 
same  physical  advantages  as  the  young  men,  I  would  ex- 
pect to  see  a  marvellous  improvement  in  the  physique  of 
the  next  generation.  One  reason  for  the  defeat  of  the 
French  in  the  last  war  with  Germany  was  the  former's 
inferior  bodily  vigor.  Napoleon's  wars  were  destructive 
of  human  life.  The  young  and  virile  men  were  killed 
and  disabled,  and  the  work  of  continuing  the  French  race 
was  left  to  the  old,  or  those  too  feeble  for  military  service. 
It  has  been  said  that  the  stature  of  the  Frenchmen  de- 
creased two  inches,  because  of  the  Napoleonic  wars. 
I  judge  the  conscription  to  which  the  French  have  had 


60  GLIMPSES  OF  THE   FUTURE. 

to  resort  will  add  to  the  bodily  vigor  of  the  race,  and 
tend  to  enable  them  to  do  better  in  their  next  conflict 
with  the  Germans.  We  Americans  live  under  favorable 
conditions  for  generating  a  strong  race  of  men  and 
women.  We  are  well  fed  ;  out-door  and  athletic  exer- 
cises are  encouraged  ;  and  we  take  more  holidays  than 
did  our  fathers.  The  hours  of  labor  have  also  been  cut 
down  by  law  and  custom.  There  are  some  splendid 
types  of  men  in  certain  sections  of  our  country,  where 
there  is  plenty  of  lime  in  the  soil,  as  in  the  blue  grass  re- 
gion south  of  the  Ohio.  Our  variable  climate  is  some- 
what against  us  ;  so  is  the  growth  of  our  factory  system. 

S.  R. — Is  it  not  unfortunate  that  our  immigrants  all 
belong  to  the  lower  classes  ?  Look  at  the  Germans,  the 
Irish,  and  worst  of  all  the  small  and  swarthy  Italians, 
who  are  making  their  homes  with  us.  How  much  better 
it  would  be  if  the  immigrants  were  from  the  upper  culti- 
vated class  of  Europeans. 

Sir  O. — There  is,  I  think,  another  side  to  that  ques- 
tion. Evolution  is  generally  from  lower  to  higher  forms 
of  life.  Your  cultivated  European  may  have  reached  a 
stage  in  which  there  is  no  further  progress.  All  the  pos- 
sibilities of  the  future  are  with  the  more  backward 
classes.  This  is  why  the  Russians  are  coming  to  the 
front,  because  their  civilization  is  undeveloped  ;  and  I 
think  those  so-called  poorer  people  of  the  Old  World  have 
more  stamina  in  them  than  the  classes  whose  culture 
may  have  robbed  them  of  their  vitality. 

S.  R.  —  Still  you  do  not  meet  the  question.  Will  the 
type  of  American,  for  instance,  advance  or  retrograde  by 
the  next  generation  ? 

Sir  O. — Candidly  there  are  so  many  considerations  in 
the  problem  you  present  that  I  must  refuse  to  commit  my- 


IMPROVING   THE   RACE.  6 1 

self.  I  do  not  think  there  will  be  any  marked  improve- 
ment in  the  race  until  scientists  take  the  matter  of  its 
continuance  into  their  hands.  They  must  lay  down  the 
law  that  should  govern  the  relation  of  the  sexes,  and 
men  and  women  must  conform  to  it.  There  is  such  a 
world  of  prejudice  to  overcome  ;  and  changes  in  social 
relations  must  be  so  radical  that  it  will  be  many  genera- 
tions before  the  conditions  will  be  such  that  we  may 
expect  any  decided  improvement. 


/ 


THE  SECRET  OF  THE  JEWISH  RACE. 


Ethnologist. — I  have  a  theory  to  suggest  with  re- 
gard to  the  Jews,  which  may  account  for  some  of  the 
peculiarities  of  that  remarkable  race.  If  there  is  any 
truth  in  the  Old-Testament  legends,  the  progenitors  of 
the  Hebrews  were  Abraham  and  Sarah  his  half-sister. 
The  marriage  of  blood  relatives  at  that  age  of  the  world 
was  not  only  permissible,  but  even  was  regarded  as  de- 
sirable. There  was  a  time  when  the  Egyptian  ruling 
families  were  of  pure  breed.  As  that  term  was  then 
understood,  it  meant  the  offspring  of  brothers  and  sis- 
ters. I  believe  inbreeding  of  this  kind  was  not  unknown 
in  Babylon,  Nineveh,  and  other  ancient  empires. 

Sir  Oracle. — The  general  impression  nowadays  is 
that  these  incestuous  marriages  would  have  very  bad  re- 
sults in  the  way  of  offspring.  Inbreeding  is  said  to  pro- 
duce insanity,  disease,  and  marked  physical  degeneration. 

Ethnologist. — Yet  we  know  this  is  not  the  case  in 
animals  domesticated  by  man.  True  you  can  produce 
weakness  by  breeding  "  too  fine,"  as  it  is  termed,  and  a 
wise  crossing  of  horses  and  cattle  is  not  only  permissible, 
but  desirable.  Yet  the  fact  remains  that  to  establish  a 
breed,  and  to  insure  excellence  in  certain  directions, 
there  must  be  a  good  deal  of  inbreeding.  Further, 
it  may  be  well  to  particularize  about  that  "  Old-Testa- 
ment legend"   to  which   I   have   just  referred.      Abra- 

62 


THE   SECRET  OF  THE  JEWISH  RACE.  63 

ham  married  his  half-sister,  his  brother  Nahor  his  niece, 
the  daughter  of  still  another  brother  ;  and  Jacob  mar- 
ried at  the  same  time  two  sisters  who  were  his  cousins. 
Esau's  wife  was  his  cousin  ;  Amram's,  his  aunt ;  and  Ju- 
dah's,  his  daughter-in-law,  the  widow  of  his  own  son. 
Whether  all  this  can  be  literally  true  or  not,  the  fact  re- 
mains clear  that  in  those  days  the  marriage  of  near  rela- 
tions was  considered  more  desirable  than  objectionable. 

Sir  O. — But  surely  there  is  some  reason  for  the  pre- 
vailing prejudice  against  such  marriages.  Do  they  not, 
as  a  matter  of  fact,  often  result  in  diseased  offspring. 

Ethnologist. — The  only  scientific  inquiry  into  the 
subject  I  know  of  is  that  conducted  by  Mr.  George  H. 
Darwin,  the  son  of  Charles  Darwin,  and  himself  no  mean 
biologist.  After  a  careful  investigation  of  the  facts,  Mr. 
Darwin  has  come  to  the  conclusion  that,  as  regards  the 
tendency  of  the  marriage  of  first  cousins  to  produce  in- 
sane offspring,  the  percentage  of  such  children  resulting 
from  such  marriages  is  not  so  much  greater  than  that  in 
the  general  population  as  to  enable  one  to  say  positively 
that  the  marriage  of  first  cousins  has  any  effect  on  the 
production  of  insanity  and  idiocy.  Yet,  while  he  comes 
to  the  general  conclusion  that  the  evil  has  been  very 
much  exaggerated,  he  nevertheless  thinks  that  there  is 
some  slight  ground  for  it.  There  can  be  no  doubt,  he 
says,  about  the  danger  of  a  nearly  related  man  and 
woman,  both  of  whom  have  inherited  a  decided  tendency 
to  some  serious  constitutional  disease  or  weakness. 
Personally  I  would  go  farther  than  this.  The  law  in 
the  case  is,  I  think,  that  the  most  pronounced  traits  in 
the  allied  blood  is  intensified  in  their  offspring.  Hence, 
if  there  is  a  tendency  to  insanity  in  cousins,  their  off- 
spring will  be  insane.     Scrofulous  or  consumptive  cous- 


64  GLIMPSES  OF  THE   FUTURE. 

ins  will  also  bring  undesirable  children  into  the  world  ; 
but  I  think  the  records  show  that  where  the  cousins  are 
wholesome  of  body  and  mentally  bright,  their  children 
will  be  the  same.  Then,  again,  if  the  parents  of  allied 
bloods  have  marked  defects  of  character,  of  body,  their 
children  will  show  in  an  intensified  degree  the  weakness 
of  their  progenitors.  Now  take  the  case  of  the  Jews. 
They  are  a  very  remarkable  race,  and  have  wonderful 
vitality.  Their  rare  abilities  and  equally  striking  de- 
fects are  as  apparent  to-day  as  they  were  two  thousand 
years  ago. 

Sir  O. — An  inquiry  into  the  secret  of  the  strength  of 
this  remarkable  race  is  timely.  Because  of  their  business 
abilities,  they  are  getting  more  than  their  share  of  wealth 
in  every  community  in  which  they  live.  The  Jew  has 
seen  the  rise  and  fall  of  the  Grecian  as  well  as  of  the 
Roman  race  ;  but  his  vitality  has  outlasted  that  of  all 
contemporary  and  succeeding  peoples.  He  is  abreast 
not  only  with  the  civilization,  but  of  the  foremost  men 
of  the  present  dominant  races  of  the  world. 

Ethnologist. — All  that  is  true  enough  ;  but  the  ques- 
tion for  you  to  answer  is  :  What  will  be  the  probable 
future  of  the  Jews  ?  Will  they  retain  their  peculiarities 
as  a  distinct  people,  or  will  they  be  absorbed  eventually 
into  the  surrounding  populations  ? 

Sir  O. — The  preservation  of  the  Hebrew  race  under 
so  many  different  conditions  of  life  is  one  of  the  marvels 
of  history.  They  have  been  scattered  over  the  earth  ; 
have  lived  in  all  climates  ;  and  have  been  subject  to 
all  kinds  of  government ;  yet  their  racial  peculiarities 
remain  the  same  as  they  were  while  in  bondage  in 
Egypt.  1,  for  one,  am  inclined  to  believe  that  the  Jew 
is  getting  ready  to  be  absorbed  into  communities  where 
he  is  treated  as  an  equal. 


THE   SECRET  OF  THE  JEWISH  RACE.  65 

George  Barrow  long  ago  pointed  out  the  fact  that  the 
Zingali  or  Gypsies  did  not  lose  their  racial  peculiarities 
until  they  were  made  equal  with  other  men  before  the 
law.  They  ceased  to  become  a  distinct  people  from  that 
time  forth.  Now  this  seems  to  me  is  what  is  happening 
to  the  Jews.  In  the  United  States  the  great  bulk  of 
them  have  become  what  is  called  "  reform  "  Jews.  They 
make  use  of  modern  music  in  their  worship,  the  sexes  sit 
together  in  the  synagogue,  the  rabbi  is  a  preacher  and 
minister  rather  than  a  priest ;  and  their  authorized  creed 
differs  but  little  from  that  of  the  New  England  Unita- 
rian. In  all  the  large  cities  of  the  Union  there  are  numer- 
ous bodies  of  Jews  who  are  Agnostics  ;  who  do  not 
believe  in  Moses  and  the  prophets,  or  even  Jehovah  and 
the  life  hereafter.  Then  there  is  a  disposition  to  get  rid 
of  the  distinctive  Hebrew  names.  There  are  thousands 
of  Jewish  children  with  Christian  surnames  ;  and  their 
number  is  growing.  The  great  Rothschild  family  have 
set  the  example  of  amalgamation  by  marrying  Christians 
of  rank.  The  case  of  the  Jews  illustrates  the  old  fable 
of  the  contest  between  the  wind  and  the  sun  to  induce 
the  traveller  to  lay  aside  his  cloak.  The  fiercer  the  wind 
blew,  the  more  tightly  did  the  traveller  clasp  his  outer 
garment  about  him  ;  but  the  melting  rays  of  the  sun 
forced  him  to  cast  it  aside.  So  long  as  the  Jew  was  per- 
secuted he  clung  to  his  religion  and  his  traditions  ;  but 
where  he  is  equal  before  the  law,  he  aspires  also  to  reach 
social  equality  and  puts  aside  his  racial  isolation.  If  we 
would  make  the  Jew  a  part  of  our  civilization,  we  must 
treat  him  as  we  would  any  other  citizen. 

Ethnologist. — Apart  from  what  you  say,  I  judge  that 
there  must  be  some  defects  in  the  Jewish  character  to 
account  for  the  way  they  have  been  treated  for  the  last 


66  GLIMPSES  OF  THE  FUTURE. 

1800  years.  It  is  to  be  noted  that  in  every  climate,  under 
every  religion,  at  every  stage  of  civilization  except  the 
last,  they  have  excited  passionate  hatred,  and  hence  have 
been  universally  persecuted.  Now  the  Hebrews  cannot 
have  been  always  right,  and  the  people  with  whom  they 
lived  always  wrong.  There  must  be  an  underlying 
cause  for  hatred  as  well  as  for  love.  In  truth,  the  Jew, 
while  he  has  brilliant  and  admirable  qualities,  is  treach- 
erous, over-reaching,  rapacious,  and  cruel.  The  race 
has  amazing  ability  ;  of  that  there  can  be  no  doubt,  es- 
pecially of  the  commercial  kind  ;  but  they  do  not  play 
fair  in  the  game  of  fortune.  Lacking  true  pride  of  char- 
acter, they  are  vain,  ostentatious,  and  insolent.  The 
anti-Semitic  agitation  in  Germany  is  due  doubtless,  in 
great  part,  to  envy  at  their  vast  accumulations  of  wealth 
in  recent  years  ;  but  it  is  in  part  justified  by  the  ostenta- 
tion and  rapacity  of  the  great  body  of  the  Jews. 

Sir  O. — There  is  no  doubt  about  it.  As  I  have  al- 
ready said,  the  Jews  of  modern  Christendom  are  forging 
ahead  of  all  their  rivals.  They  are  getting  vastly  more 
than  their  share  of  the  wealth  of  the  community  ;  and 
what  is  still  more  significant  they  are  willing  to  give  their 
children  the  advantage  of  the  best  education.  Our  uni- 
versities and  colleges,  male  and  female,  contain  a  great 
many  Jews  and  Jewesses.  It  is  desirable  for  the  Jews 
themselves  that  they  should  blend  with  the  populations 
about  them  ;  for  if  they  should  continue  to  be  a  distinct 
class  their  vast  accumulations  of  wealth  will  in  time 
excite  the  jealous  fury  of  all  the  rest  of  our  people. 

Ethnologist. — I  think  there  is  this  moral  to  be 
drawn  from  the  history  of  the  Jews.  We  should  pay 
more  attention  to  heredity  ;  and  experiments  should  be 
made  to  found  families  having  distinctive  and  admirable 


THE   SECRET  OF  THE  JEWISH  RACE.  6y 

characteristics.  We  have  had  some  remarkable  families 
in  this  country,  as  witness  the  Beechers.  The  offspring 
of  old  Lyman  Beecher  from  his  two  wives  were  all  of 
them  distinguished  as  either  speakers  or  writers.  Yet 
so  far  as  we  know,  the  second  or  third  generation  of  the 
family  are  only  average  people.  Recalling  Abraham  and 
Sarah,  one  cannot  but  think  of  Mrs.  Beecher  Stowe's 
horror  of  the  supposed  relations  between  Lord  Byron 
and  his  half-sister  Mrs.  Leigh.  It  is  hard  to  avoid  specu- 
lating on  what  might  have  happened  had  the  public  opin- 
ion of  our  time  condoned  a  union  between  that  family 
of  half-brothers  and  half-sisters.  Then  there  is  the 
Adams  family — a  race  of  statesmen  for  three  generations 
without  the  aid  of  the  intermarriage  of  allied  bloods. 
Then  again  the  Harrison  family,  which  have  produced 
men  of  considerable  note  from  the  time  of  Cromwell  to 
our  own  day.  Further  there  is  the  Leland  family,  whose 
specialty  seems  to  be  hotel-keeping  ;  and  the  Washburn 
family,  four  brothers  of  whom  were  intelligent  and  suc- 
cessful politicians.  Doubtless  there  are  hundreds  if  not 
thousands  of  other  families,  the  members  of  which  had 
marked  special  abilities  ;  but  we  have  no  machinery  for 
conserving  and  perpetuating  breeds  of  special  excellence. 
Sir  O. — With  our  present  marriage  customs  I  do  not 
see  how  it  is  possible  even  to  discuss  the  means  to  be 
used  for  generating  certain  breeds  of  human  beings 
The  Oneida  Communists  made  an  experiment  in  stirpi- 
culture.  Seventy  children  were  born  under  a  system 
which  eliminated  undesirable  parents  and  confined 
parentage  to  the  most  desirable  males  and  females  in  the 
Community  family.  The  result  was  in  every  way  re- 
markable. Though  much  of  the  original  stock  was  poor 
enough,  only  two  of  the  seventy  children  born  died  be- 


68  GLIMPSES  OF  THE  FUTURE. 

fore  the  age  of  five.  In  the  tenement-house  district  of 
our  large  cities,  half  the  children  die  before  that  age. 
But  the  Christian  people  of  Oneida  County  were  horrified 
at  this  attempt  to  improve  the  race  without  reference  to 
the  ordinary  marriage  conventions  ;  and  they  forced  the 
Communists  to  become  monogamists.  Polygamy  is 
practised  all  over  the  earth.  It  is  indeed  the  most  popu- 
lar form  of  marriage,  though  it  does  not  produce  such 
good  results  as  monogamy.  But  the  attempt  of  the 
Mormons  to  practise  this  ancient  and  honored  form  of 
marriage  is  antagonized  by  the  whole  United  States  ; 
and  our  Congress,  in  obedience  to  the  outraged  and  ig- 
norant sensibilities  of  the  community,  has  passed  laws 
to  put  a  stop  to  it,  and  to  rob  that  sect  of  their  property. 
I  doubt,  if  in  any  part  of  the  world,  for  the  next  century, 
there  will  be  found  any  community  willing  to  make  ex- 
periments in  improving  the  human  race,  as  the  domestic 
animals  have  been  improved. 


\    DISCURSIVE    CHAPTER. 


Utopian. — Why  not  devote  a  chapter  to  possible 
Utopias  ?  I  know  that  your  wish  to  follow  out  the  line 
of  existing  tendencies  without  reference  to  your  own 
ideas  as  to  how  the  tangled  scheme  of  human  affairs 
should  be  arranged  ;  but  suppose  we  dwell  upon  some 
of  the  ideal  states  towards  which  so  many  think  the  race 
is  tending.  Now  war  is  irrational  and  in  every  way  ob- 
jectionable. Is  there  not  growing  up  a  sentiment  against 
it  ?  Is  it  so  wild  a  dream  to  expect  that  in  the  next 
century  great  international  courts  will  settle  disputes  be- 
tween nations  ? 

Sir  Oracle. — I  do  not  take  any  stock  in  the  plan  of 
settling  disputes  between  nations  by  arbitration  or  inter- 
national courts.  No  court  can  speak  with  authority  un- 
less it  has  at  its  command  the  physical  power  of  a  nation 
or  nations.  In  other  words,  the  club  of  the  policeman 
and  the  bayonet  of  the  soldier  must  carry  out  the  fiat  of 
a  court  of  last  resort.  We  cannot  have  peace  in  Europe 
until  there  is  one  nation  so  powerful  that  the  others  will 
be  forced  to  obey  its  behests.  For  thirty  years  past  I 
have  believed  that  Russia  would  be  the  predominant 
power  on  the  continent  of  Europe.  If  it  did  not  actually 
conquer  the  Teutonic  and  Latin  races,  its  military  supe- 
riority would  be  so  great  that  the  latter  would  be  forced 
to    acknowledge    its    supremacy.     Then,   but   not   until 

69 


yo  GLIMPSES   OF  THE  FUTURE. 

then,  will  it  be  feasible  to  reduce  armaments  and  military 
expenses. 

Utopian. — Our  readers  will  think  that  forecast  as 
wild  as  my  dream  of  universal  peace  through  the  estab- 
lishment of  courts  of  international  arbitration.  You 
speak  of  the  future  preponderance  of  Russia  in  Europe. 
Will  it  not  be  still  more  the  master  of  Asia  ? 

Sir  O. — The  Muscovite  is  performing  a  wonderful 
work  in  Central  Asia  ;  and,  from  a  superficial  point  of 
view,  it  would  seem  as  if  it  must  come  into  the  posses- 
sion of  both  India  and  China.  A  great  source  of  strength 
to  the  Russian  power  is  its  ability  to  absorb  and  assimi- 
late the  races  it  conquers.  The  scattered  tribes  which 
have  heretofore  occupied  all  Central  Asia  will,  in  the 
next  generation,  be  as  good  Russians  as  are  the  people 
of  Moscow  or  those  who  live  in  and  near  St.  Petersburg. 
The  blending  of  races,  which  has  been  going  on  in 
Russia  for  three  hundred  years  or  longer,  is  something 
quite  remarkable.  The  English  race  in  all  parts  of  the 
world  exterminates  the  savages  or  semi-civilized  peoples 
with  whom  it  comes  in  contact,  as  witness  the  fate  of  the 
Red  Indian,  and  the  aborigines  of  Australia  and  New 
Zealand, — in  short  all  races  save  alone  the  Hindoos, 
which  were  too  numerous  to  be  exterminated.  The 
Latin  races  have  blended  with  the  inferior  peoples 
which  they  dominated,  but  the  mixtures  have  generally 
been  unfortunate.  Hence  the  inferiority  of  the  people 
of  Mexico,  Central  and  South  America  to  those  of  North 
America  and  Australia. 

Utopian. — This  seems  to  me  a  digression.  Why  do 
you  speak  so  confidently  of  Russia  practically  overrun- 
ning the  rest  of  Europe  and  yet  hesitate  in  predicting  its 
mastery  of  Asia?     Surely  the  Teutons,  the  Latins,  and 


A    DISCURSIVE   CHAPTER.  7 1 

the  Anglo-Saxons  are  more  likely  to  be  able  to  resist  the 
conquering  march  of  the  Russians  than  the  people  of 
Hindoostan  or  China. 

Sir  O. — I  presume  it  is  written  in  the  Book  of  Destiny 
that  Russia,  within  the  next  fifty  years,  will  get  posses- 
sion of  Turkey,  Persia,  and  Hindoostan  ;  but  in  China 
there  are  four  hundred  millions  of  people.  They  do  not 
fear  death  ;  they  are  amenable  to  discipline  ;  and,  prop- 
erly armed  and  led,  I  don't  see  why  they  might  not  be  a 
match  even  for  the  Russian  power.  Auguste  Comte 
says  somewhere  that,  if  the  Chinese  could  believe  in 
God,  they  would  conquer  the  world.  I  confess  to  being 
somewhat  puzzled  as  to  the  connection  between  a  theis- 
tic  faith  and  military  ambition,  but,  curiously  enough, 
recent  writers — John  Russel  Young,  late  Minister  to 
China,  among  others — have  given  it  as  their  opinion  that 
China  possesses  all  the  elements  of  a  first-class  military 
power.  They  are  becoming  armed  very  rapidly  as  the 
aggressiveness  of  Western  Europe  is  forcing  them  to 
learn  the  arts  of  war.  Just  think  of  the  mighty  armies 
that  China  could  send  out  if  she  was  intent  on  overcom- 
ing her  enemies  !  The  latter  would  be  literally  over- 
whelmed by  numbers. 

Utopian. — In  view  of  the  wretched  figure  that  China 
cut  as  a  military  power  when  attacked  by  the  French 
and  English  fleets  and  armies  this  notion  of  yours  will 
be  laughed  at  as  absurd. 

Sir  O. — I  am  willing  to  admit  that,  so  far  as  present 
appearances  go,  Russia  is  as  likely  to  overpower  China 
as  she  is  to  get  possession  of  India. 

Utopian. — What  a  gigantic  power  Russia  would  be 
were  she  to  become  supreme  both  in  Europe  and  Asia  ! 
In  that  case  there  would  be  only  one  other  nation  which 


J2  GLIMPSES   OF  THE  FUTURE. 

could  be  set  against  her — the  United  States  of  North 
America. 

Sir  0. — In  the  next  great  war  in  which  Great  Britain 
is  engaged  it  is  not  unlikely  that  she  will  lose  the  Do- 
minion of  Canada,  which  will  become  a  part  of  the 
United  States.  Sometime  in  the  twentieth  century  the 
Pacific  Ocean  will  become  the  scene  of  great  naval  con- 
flicts. The  British  colonies  will  probably  become  inde- 
pendent nationalities  whose  fleets  will  command  or  try 
to  command  .the  vast  commerce  of  the  Pacific  Ocean. 
Russia  and  the  United  States  will  contest  this  naval 
supremacy. 

Utopian. — Russia  !  What  chance  has  she  of  becom- 
ing a  naval  power  in  the  Pacific  ? 

Sir  O. — In  a  few  years  the  trans-Siberian  railroad  will 
be  completed.  Then  it  will  not  be  long  before  Persia 
will  be  absorbed  by  Russia,  and  a  great  naval  station 
established  in  the  Persian  Gulf.  The  attack  on  Hindoo- 
stan  may  come  from  this  quarter  rather  than  Herat,  sup- 
posed to  be  the  key  of  India.  England  will  lose  the  penin- 
sula of  Hindoostan  before  the  year  1950. 

Utopian. — Will  Russia  remain  an  autocracy  ? 

Sir  O. — The  form  of  its  government  must  change.  I 
think  Western  Europe  will  become  a  kind  of  Federal 
Republic  ;  but  of  course  a  power  which  is  dominant  in 
Asia  cannot  tolerate  democratic  forms  among  such  semi- 
civilized  people  as  the  Hindoos  for  instance.  The  gov- 
ernments of  the  future  will  be  more  complex  than  in  the 
past.  There  are  good  points  in  Imperialism,  Aristocracy, 
and  Democracy  ;  I  should  not  be  surprised  if  the  Rus- 
sian government  of  the  future  utilized  all  manner  of 
governmental  system  in  its  administration  of  the  affairs 
of  Europe  and  Asia.     Take  the  British  government  of 


A    DISCURSIVE   CHAPTER.  Jl, 

to-day.  It  is  a  constitutional  monarchy  in  Great  Britain, 
a  despotic  empire  in  India,  and  a  practical  democracy  in 
the  Dominion  of  Canada  and  the  South  Pacific  colonies. 
Legislative  government  was  tried  in  Jamaica  ;  but  it  was 
a  failure,  and  that  island  is  now  wisely  governed  by  a 
crown-appointed  executive. 

Utopian. — Do  I  understand  you  aright  ?  Are  you 
not  a  Democrat  ?  Is  not  some  form  of  representative 
government  the  ultimate  good  of  all  the  nations  ?  Will 
not  despotism  and  privileged  classes  disappear  before 
the  close  of  the  twentieth  century  ? 

Sir  O. — I  am  not  a  doctrinaire  as  to  forms  of  govern- 
ment. All  political  institutions,  however  opposite  in 
their  character,  were  adapted  to  certain  social  conditions. 
The  ideal  government  will  make  use  of  all  kinds  of 
political  machinery,  autocratic,  aristocratic,  and  demo- 
cratic. I  think,  as  I  have  already  said,  that  the  ten- 
dency is  for  governments  to  become  more  and  more  a 
factor  in  human  affairs.  And  here,  I  judge,  that  Spen- 
cer's secondary  law  of  evolution,  viz.  :  "  that  progress  is 
from  a  state  of  indefinite,  incoherent  homogeneity  to 
definite,  coherent,  heterogeneity,"  comes  into  play.  All 
fundamental  law  should  be  elastic  enough  to  admit  of 
the  use  of  all  governmental  powers  which  are  essential 
to  the  wise  administration  of  human  affairs.  It  is  this 
plasticity  which  distinguishes  all  really  great  nations. 
Rome  was  a  republic  in  which  the  powers  of  the  state 
were  divided  between  the  plebeians  and  patricians  ;  but 
when  a  serious  war  was  on  hand  a  dictatorship  was  de- 
clared and  supreme  power  lodged  in  a  commanding 
general.  The  United  States  could  not  crush  the  Con- 
federate States  under  its  Constitution.  It  fell  back  on 
the  intangible  war  power,  which  was  a  mere  legal  fiction  ; 


74  GLIMPSES  OF  THE   FUTURE. 

but  it  represented  the  life  of  the  nation,  using  all  its  in- 
herent powers  to  protect  itself  from  destruction.  It 
would  be  well  for  us  to  bear  this  fact  in  mind,  that 
during  our  civil  war  our  Federal  Constitution  was  set 
aside.  Happy  is  the  nation  which  can  adapt  itself  to 
circumstances  and  make  use  of  any  governmental  form 
that  will  prolong  its  life  and  add  to  the  happiness  of  its 
people. 

Utopian. — You  take  my  breath  away  !  What  will  all 
our  Republicans  and  Democrats  and  individualists  think 
of  such  doctrines  ?  You  will  be  regarded  as  a  reaction- 
ary of  the  very  worst  type.  Are  not  some  forms  of  gov- 
ernment better  than  others  ? 

Sir  O. — If  my  contemporaries  think  my  vague  utter- 
ances unsound,  I  appeal  from  them  to  the  generation 
that  will  live  at  the  close  of  the  twentieth  century.  Of 
course  some  forms  of  government  are  better  than  others. 
Countries  with  free  institutions  are  generally  happier 
than  those  in  which  authority  is  concentrated  in  individ- 
uals or  a  class.  My  contention  is  that  the  ideal  govern- 
ment of  the  future  will  be  a  complex  one — that  it  will  be 
plastic  and  will  not  have  one  rule  applicable  to  all  races 
and  conditions  of  men.  I  think  individual  happiness 
will  better  be  brought  about  by  such  a  government  than 
if  the  central  authority  fulfilled  Herbert  Spencer's  ideal 
of  simply  maintaining  peace  and  enforcing  strict  justice 
between  all  individuals. 

Utopian. — Have  you  no  theory  of  your  own  as  to  the 
woman  question,  for  instance  ?  What  will  be  the  status 
of  the  female  sex  during  the  coming  generation  ? 

Sir  O. — One  can  only  say  in  a  general  way  that  the 
drift  of  things  is  towards  the  emancipation  of  women. 
In  other  words,  there  will  be  greater  variety  in  their  lives 


A    DISCURSIVE   CHAPTER.  75 

and  employments  than  there  has  been  in  the  past.  I  am 
speaking  not  only  of  the  modern  civilized  world,  but  I 
judge  that  the  status  of  women  is  getting  to  be  somewhat 
different  among  semi-civilized  people.  The  rapid  inter- 
communication of  intelligence  throughout  the  world  in- 
sensibly influences  all  classes  in  all  countries. 

Utopian. — Of  course,  from  my  point  of  view,  the  en- 
larged opportunities  of  women  will  be  of  great  advantage 
to  the  sex,  without  injuring  in  any  way  the  men.  Their 
improved  education  and  training  will  make  them  better 
wives  and  mothers.  The  female  influence  in  politics  will 
be  refining.  When  women  vote  there  will  be  an  end  to 
wars,  the  liquor  traffic  will  be  suppressed,  and  the  social 
purity  of  women  put  legally  upon  a  higher  plan. 

Sir  O. — I  wish  I  could  be  as  hopeful  as  you  are  as  to 
the  final  result  of  the  woman  movement.  There  is  no 
disputing  the  extension  of  the  influence  of  the  female 
sex.  Formerly  they  were  wives  and  mothers,  and  the 
sphere  of  their  industries  was  confined  to  the  household  ; 
but  the  growth  of  the  modern  factory  system  took  away 
the  home  employments  of  the  mothers  and  daughters 
of  the  working  part  of  the  community.  The  great  bulk 
of  the  women  are  now  forced  into  the  labor  market,  out- 
side of  their  homes  ;  they  are  competing  with  men  in 
hundreds  of  employments  formerly  monopolized  by  the 
latter.  This  change  undoubtedly  has  some  advantages  ; 
but  has  it  not  destroyed  the  old  ideal  of  the  home,  and 
may  not  its  moral  effect  eventually  be  hurtful  ?  A  woman 
who  can  "  paddle  her  own  canoe  "  in  the  way  of  making 
a  living  can  afford  to  set  at  nought  in  a  measure  the  con- 
ventions of  sexual  morality.  Look  at  the  throngs  of 
women  in  Paris  who  follow  lives  of  pleasure,  and  do  en- 
tirely as  they  like  in  dealing  with  men.     Many  are  work- 


j6  GLIMPSES  OF  THE  FUTURE. 

ing-women,  others  are  artists,  actresses,  and  singers. 
What  has  often  kept  a  woman  pure  is  the  fact  that  she 
did  not  care  to  mar  her  chances  for  marriage  ;  which  was 
the  only  way  the  vast  bulk  of  the  sex  could  assure  them- 
selves of  support.  But  women  who  have  occupations 
which  give  them  food  and  clothing  are  under  no  such 
prudential  restraints.  Hence  I  apprehend  that  with  the 
more  varied  employments  of  woman  in  industry,  there 
will  come  some  tolerance  of  conduct  such  as  has  always 
been  condoned  in  men.  This  is  the  reason  why  I  think 
that  eventually  in  the  sexual  relations  of  the  future  the 
various  forms  of  marriage,  tested  by  sections  of  the  race 
from  time  to  time,  will  be  found  practically  operative  in 
the  cities  of  our  modern  world. 

Utopian. — That  statement, to  me  is  a  libel  upon  the 
fair  sex,  and  will  be  so  regarded  by  your  readers. 

Sir  O. — I  doubt  if  the  variations  from  monogamy, 
which  I  think  I  foresee  in  the  future,  will  be  as  offensive 
as  what  we  now  call  prostitution.  You  recall  Burke's 
oft-quoted  phrase  about  vice  losing  half  its  evil  by  losing 
all  its  grossness.  The  woman  who  can  make  her  own 
living  mingles  some  sentiment  and  romance  in  her  inti- 
mate relations  with  the  other  sex.  This  saves  her  from 
the  lowest  depths  of  degradation.  There  are  differences 
between  the  women  who  sell  their  persons  for  a  living, 
and  those  who  yield  their  affections  or  even  caprices. 

Utopian. — I  do  not  care  to  dwell  on  that  phase  of  the 
subject.  Will  not  the  bulk  of  women  remain  pure  in  the 
sense  we  use  the  term  ;  and  will  not  their  influence  in 
politics  be  beneficial. 

Sir  O. — Women  have  shown  to  better  advantage  than 
men  as  monarchs — as  rulers  of  great  empires.  But  this 
was  only  when  they  ruled  in  their  own  right.     The  mis- 


A   DISCURSIVE   CHAPTER.  JJ 

tresses  of  kings,  and  very  often  their  queens,  have  proved 
hurtful  to  the  state.  I  confess  I  should  like  to  see  the 
experiment  of  female  suffrage  tried  in  some  settled  State. 
I  should  decidedly  object  to  making  them  voters  over 
the  whole  Union  without  such  preliminary  experiments. 
Women  are  getting  into  politics  quite  rapidly  enough. 
They  vote  for  school  offices,  are  being  placed  on  school 
boards  ;  they  have  their  say  in  the  public  and  private 
charities  of  the  State.  Even  in  conservative  England, 
through  their  Primrose  Leagues  and  other  organizations, 
women  take  part  in  election  contests.  Still  it  seems  to 
me  that  the  part  for  a  woman  to  play  is  that  of  wife  and 
mother.  Her  real  mission  is  to  continue  the  race  under 
the  best  possible  circumstances.  It  is  a  question  whether 
factory  help,  telegraphers,  store  clerks,  waiters,  and  busi- 
ness women  of  all  kinds  live  the  kind  of  life  which  en- 
sures the  best  progeny.  Indeed  I  imagine  that  the  more 
diversified  are  the  employments  of  women,  the  stronger 
the  tendency  with  them  to  shirk  the  responsibilities  of 
maternity  ;  hence  the  continuance  of  the  race  is  not  left 
to  the  educated,  industrious,  and  highly  trained  women, 
but  to  the  poor,  the  shiftless,  and  the  stupid. 

Utopian. — When  the  relations  of  the  sexes  become 
normal  will  not  the  moral  rule  which  obtains  in  the  ani- 
mal creation  be  the  guide  of  the  human  race.  There  is 
no  desire  among  beasts  except  in  the  rutting  season. 
When  the  female  is  impregnated  that  is  the  end  of  the 
matter  so  far  as  the  beasts  are  concerned.  If  we  have  a 
millennium  will  not  that  rule  apply  to  men  and  women  ? 

Sir  O. — That  view  of  the  relation  of  the  sexes  has 
been  advanced  a  thousand  times  by  so-called  social  re- 
formers ;  but  it  seems  to  me  that  man  has  made  an  enor- 
mous advance  upon  the  beasts  in  making  use  of  sex  pos- 


78  GLIMPSES  OF  THE  FUTURE. 

sibilities  to  add  to  his  comfort  and  happiness.  A  beast 
has  the  sexual  impulse  once  or  twice  a  year ;  men  and 
women  are  under  its  influence  in  one  form  or  another 
nearly  all  the  time  ;  but  what  in  the  beasts  is  a  mere  mo- 
mentary surge  of  passion,  is  to  man  only  the  beginning 
of  a  series  of  emotional  pleasures,  among  the  most  de- 
lightful known  to  the  race.  From  this  tap-root,  down  if 
you  will  into  the  very  mire  of  our  nature,  spring  the  fam- 
ily affections,  the  high  ideals,  the  romance  of  our  lives. 
The  most  exquisite  flower,  exhaling  the  most  delicious 
perfume,  is  indebted  for  its  beauty  and  charm  to  the  root 
that  is  fed  by  the  foulest  manure.  And  so  with  the  sex- 
ual instinct,  which  we  share  with  the  hyena  and  the  goat. 
It  has  been  utilized  by  man  so  as  to  sweeten  and  per- 
fume his  life.  Let  us  hear  no  more  about  the  sexual 
morality  of  the  beasts. 

Utopian. — What  a  world  of  criticism  some  of  the 
points  you  have  made  in  this  conversation  will  provoke. 

Sir  O. — I  probably  look  at  this  matter  from  a  point  of 
view  different  from  that  of  the  average  moralist ;  but 
those  who  know  will  testify  that  I  have  not  lived  an  im- 
moral life,  and  have  never  done  any  thing  that  would 
make  my  family  ashamed  of  me.  What  I  have  been  say- 
ing will  seem  like  a  truism  fifty  years  from  now. 


IS  A   UNIVERSAL    LANGUAGE    POSSIBLE  ? 


Linguist. — I  believe,  Sir  Oracle,  that  the  whole  of 
civilized  mankind  is  destined  ultimately  to  speak  the 
same  tongue.  It  may  take  centuries  to  bring  about 
this  consummation  ;  but,  however  long  it  takes,  I  think 
there  can  be  no  doubt  of  the  final  result. 

Sir  Oracle. — I  notice  in  this  pretty  prediction  that 
you  refer  very  vaguely  to  time.  The  matter  of  a  mere 
century  or  so  seems  to  make  no  difference  to  you.  And, 
indeed,  considering  the  amount  of  time  you  have  at  the 
disposal  of  your  imagination,  I  see  no  reason  why  you 
should  bother  yourself  over  such  a  small  matter  as  a  few 
hundred  years.  All  of  us,  however,  have  not  eternity  at 
our  bidding.  I,  for  one,  am  limited,  in  this  book  at  least, 
to  dealing  with  the  tendencies  of  the  immediate  future. 
So  I  hardly  think  it  right  to  inflict  upon  my  readers  the 
possible  results  of  a  thousand  years  from  now. 

Linguist. — Your  conscience  in  this  matter  has  all  of 
a  sudden  become  remarkably  tender.  There  is  a  con- 
sideration, however,  which  may  tend  to  toughen  it.  Sup- 
pose you  confine  yourself  to  the  negative  side  of  the  con- 
versation. Keep  predicting  constantly  and  positively 
that  nothing  which  I  say  has  any  bearing  on  the  immedi- 
ate future.  Your  readers  may  get  from  you  then  that 
which  by  this  time  they  must  have  learned  to  expect — 
forecasts  which,  to  say  the  least,  are  doubtful. 

79 


80  GLIMPSES   OF  THE  FUTURE. 

Sir  O. — Upon  those  terms,  perhaps,  I  may  consent  to 
point  our  conversation.  Say  your  say  ;  but  say  it 
shortly. 

Linguist. — In  the  past,  amalgamation  of  language  has 
been  a  common  occurrence.  Every  modern  language 
is  a  selection  from  a  variety  of  different  tongues  and 
dialects.  The  words  of  the  English  vocabulary  can  be 
traced  back  to  at  least  twelve  different  dialects,  the  users 
of  which  before  the  fusion  took  place  could  not  under- 
stand one  another.  The  French,  Italian,  and  Spanish 
languages,  now  apparently  so  homogeneous,  were  origi- 
nally as  divergent  as  the  English  tongue.  This  gradual 
fusion,  this  welding  into  one  form  of  speech,  took  place 
in  periods  of  the  world's  history  when  there  was  not 
much  travelling,  and  when  neither  ideas  nor  words  could 
be  quickly  interchanged.  To-day  a  thousand  persons 
are  on  the  road,  fairly  flying  from  point  to  point,  where 
one  changed  his  habitation  in  former  centuries.  Now  I 
believe  that  the  civilized  world  is  gradually  creating  a 
common  language.  Every  new  dictionary  contains 
words  drawn  from  the  speech  of  other  nations.  When 
Peter  the  Great  taught  his  people  shipbuilding  and  how 
to  navigate  the  seas,  he  was  forced  to  use  Dutch  and 
English  technical  words,  as  the  Russian  language  had  no 
equivalent  terms  to  convey  an  idea  of  these  novelties 
to  the  Russian  people.  And  this  process  is  constantly 
going  on.  We  are  borrowing  from  the  French,  Ger- 
mans, Spaniards,  and  Italians,  and  they  from  us,  and 
this  fusion  is  being  carried  forward  so  rapidly  that 
before  the  close  of  the  twentieth  century  a  universal 
dictionary  will  be  published  in  which  the  entire  world 
will  find  words  that  can  be  used  anywhere. 

Sir  O. — Stop  a  bit  and  let  me  sift  a  little  your  confi- 


IS  A    UNIVERSAL   LANGUAGE  POSSIBLE?       8 1 

dent  remarks.  It  is  quite  true,  as  you  say,  that  the  in- 
creasing intercourse  between  the  nations  of  the  world 
leads  to  an  interchange  of  words.  It  cannot  help  do 
otherwise.  The  French,  when  they  adopt  any  thing  from 
the  English — such  as  the  beefsteak,  for  instance — filch 
the  name  as  well  as  the  thing.  Then  there  are  certain 
phrases  in  every  language  that  peculiarly  fit  the  ideas 
they  express,  and  familiarity  with  these  phrases,  such  as 
is  brought  about  by  the  healthy  intercourse  between  one 
nation  and  another,  leads  to  their  cosmopolitan  use. 
All  this  is  true.  But  the  limits  of  such  an  interchange 
are  not  hard  to  find  ;  and  when  found  they  vitally  hurt 
your  argument.  Such  interchanges  do  not  take  place  in 
the  essential  but  only  in  the  accidental  elements  of  a 
language.  However  useful  an  Englishman  may  find 
such  phrases  as  "  jeu  d'esprit,"  or  "par  excellence,"  he 
will  always  call  bread  "  bread  "  and  not  "  pain."  And 
so  it  will  be  with  the  two  or  three  thousand  words  in 
each  language  which  constitute  an  ordinary  man's' 
vocabulary.  I,  for  my  part,  cannot  conceive  of  any 
good  reply  to  this  objection. 

Linguist. — I  can  simply  turn  to  the  past.  In  the 
formation  of  any  language,  every  dialect  which  went  up 
to  make  it  must  each  have  had  a  word  for  the  ordinary 
things  and  actions  of  life.  Yet  in  the  course  of  time  one 
word  was  dropped  and  another  selected.  Take  the  case 
of  the  French  language.  In  eight  or  nine  hundred  a.d. 
there  were  almost  as  many  dialects  in  France  as  there 
were  counties.  Now  in  each  of  those  counties  they 
must  have  eaten  bread  and  had  a  word  for  it.  Yet  at 
present  bread  is  "  pain  "  from  the  Pyrenees  to  the  Eng- 
lish Channel. 

Sir  O. — It  is  not  very  difficult  to  deal  with  that  argu- 


82  GLIMPSES   OF  THE  FUTURE. 

ment.  It  amounts  to  this  :  languages  have  become 
amalgamated  in  the  past,  hence  they  will  become  amal- 
gamated in  the  future.  Now  obviously  this  is  only  true 
if  the  conditions  in  the  future  will  be  the  same  as  they 
have  been  in  the  past.  In  some  places  doubtless  they 
will.  Nothing  is  more  common  in  Africa  at  the  present 
day  than  the  creation,  the  fusion,  and  the  extinction  of 
dialects.  But  nobody  will  be  wild  enough  to  make  the 
statement  that  the  conditions  of  the  civilized  part  of 
mankind  are  the  same  as  those  at  present  existing  in 
Africa  or  those  of  a  thousand  years  ago  in  France. 
This  reply  is  so  simple  and  plain  that,  important  as  it  is, 
I  can  afford  to  pass  it  over  with  a  few  words.  The  fact 
that  the  leading  nations  of  modern  Europe,  each  and 
every  one,  have  a  literature,  is  sufficient  in  itself  to  make 
the  prospects  of  a  universal  language  shaky  in  the  ex- 
treme, for  a  literature  always  creates  rigidity  of  form. 
That  is,  the  great  authors  of  a  nation  are  themselves  the 
arbiters  of  the  propriety  or  impropriety  of  a  word,  and 
so  long  as  there  is  a  standard  of  this  kind  but  very  little 
change  is  possible.  Are  we  not  continually  urged  by  all 
good  writers  to  avoid  as  we  would  the  plague  the  barbar- 
isms of  modern  vulgarity  ?  And  is  it  not  perfectly  right 
that  we  should  follow  their  advice,  and  without  becom- 
ing pedantic  purists,  at  least  be  careful  to  keep  the  "  well 
of  English  undented "  ?  A  language  with  a  literature 
cannot  change  radically. 

Linguist. — How  about  the  Latin  language  ?  Did  not 
that  change  radically  in  spite  of  Virgil  and  Lucretius  ? 

Sir  O. — Your  question  brings  me  to  the  second  step 
in  my  argument.  The  Latin  language  has  never  changed  ; 
but  the  Roman  nation  has.  The  abiding  character  of  a 
language  must  depend  of  course  on  the  abiding  character 


IS  A    UNIVERSAL   LANGUAGE   POSSIBLE?       83 

of  a  people.  Disintegrate  a  nation  with  a  literature,  and 
you  do  not  destroy  the  literature  ;  you  only  blot  the  com- 
mon use  of  the  language  of  that  literature.  A  literature 
does  not  die,  although  its  creator  may.  In  other  words, 
although  the  perpetuation  of  the  use  of  a  language  in  its 
pure  form  is  conditioned  on  the  perpetuation  of  the  soci- 
ety which  employs  it,  the  perpetuation  of  the  existence 
of  that  language  depends  upon  nothing  except  the  pres- 
ervation of  the  manuscripts.  It  results  from  this  plainly 
that  the  English  of  Byron,  the  French  of  Hugo,  and  the 
German  of  Goethe  are  as  immortal  as  the  human  race. 
Nevertheless  it  is  perfectly  possible  that  the  common  use 
of  these  languages  may  disappear — that  is,  they  may  be- 
come dead  as  Latin  and  Greek  are  dead.  But  if  ever  this 
comes  to  pass,  it  will  be  only  when  England,  France, 
and  Germany  no  longer  exist  as  separate  nations. 

Linguist. — But  why  should  they  continue  to  exist  as 
separate  nations  ?  You  yourself  have  predicted  that 
Russia  will  overwhelm  the  rest  of  Europe.  If  your  pre- 
diction is  true,  would  there  not  necessarily  be  a  fusion  of 
languages,  and  the  creation  of  a  universal  tongue,  in 
which  Russian  would  predominate  ?  On  that  hypothesis 
a  process  would  take  place,  similar  to  that  which  has 
already  taken  place  in  France.  The  present  French 
tongue,  as  you  have  said,  was  at  one  time  only  one  dia- 
lect among  many  in  France.  It  happened  that  the  peo- 
ple using  this  dialect — the  inhabitants  of  the  province 
called  L'lle  de  France — had  the  happiness  of  being  the 
personal  friend  of  the  French  king.  As  his  power  grew, 
the  use  of  the  present  French  became  more  common, 
until  it  finally  was  metamorphosed  into  the  national 
tongue.  If  then  Russia  extended  her  power  as  the  French 
kings    have  extended    theirs,  Russian  would   pass   into 


84  GLIMPSES  OF  THE   FUTURE. 

general  use.  For  my  part  I  do  not  believe  that  Russia 
will  be  able  to  overpower  the  rest  of  Europe.  I  believe 
that  in  the  first  place  Europe  would  be  too  much  for 
her  in  a  possible  struggle  ;  and  in  the  second  place,  that 
the  days  of  conquest  among  the  civilized  nations  are  over. 
This,  however,  is  all  more  or  less  a  matter  of  conjecture. 
I  prefer  to  base  my  argument  on  more  substantial  possi- 
bilities and  less  questionable  tendencies.  I  was  perhaps 
wrong  in  insisting  on  the  importance  of  the  change  of 
words  which  arise  from  the  intercourse  as  at  present 
carried  on  between  nations.  But  in  the  future  will  not 
the  intercourse  be  close  and  firm  enough  to  affect  the 
essentials  as  well  as  merely  the  accidents  of  language  ? 

Sir  O. — Upon  such  a  ground  your  position  is  certainly 
stronger  ;  but  still,  in  my  opinion,  by  no  means  unassail- 
able. Intercourse  merely — as  such — cannot  at  the  present 
time  bring  about  a  fusion  of  tongues.  No  universal 
language  can  possibly  become  universally  adopted  until 
community  of  interest  is  so  widespread  that  all  merely 
national  distinctions  are  effaced.  At  present  the  nations 
of  Europe  are  a  set  of  warring  units,  jealous  of  each 
other  and  grasping  for  power.  It  will  not  be  until  the 
interest  of  one  nation  and  the  interest  of  all  nations  be- 
come identical  that  the  social  conditions  which  are  pre- 
supposed by  a  universal  language  will  be  found.  As  long 
as  there  is  a  protective  tariff  on  earth,  men  will  never 
speak  the  same  tongue.  Remember,  then,  before  you 
again  make  the  assertion  with  which  you  started  this 
chapter,  that  before  what  you  predicted  can  come  to 
pass  men  must  be  protected  by  the  same  laws,  actuated 
by  the  same  motives,  enlightened  by  the  same  religion. 

Linguist. — Not  so  fast.  You  have  been  assuming  all 
along  that  a  language  like  a  polity  must  grow.     Why  can 


IS  A    UNIVERSAL  LANGUAGE  POSSIBLE/       85 

one  not  be  made  ?  We  all  know  that  it  is  perfectly  pos- 
sible to  make  a  language.  Leibnitz  tried  to  construct 
one  two  hundred  years  ago  ;  but  his  attempt  was  not 
successful  because  of  the  lack  of  sufficient  data.  Other 
people  less  noted,  have  also  spent  time  on  the  subject. 
Stephen  Pearl  Andrews  thought  that  there  is  a  perfect 
language  which  needs  only  to  be  discovered.  Every 
sound,  he  alleges,  is  charged  with  a  meaning,  which  man 
will  some  day  find  out.  The  sounds  under  the  head  of 
"  R  "  signify  strife,  contention,  such  as  war,  rough,  riot, 
and  the  like,  while  the  "  L "  sounds  characterize  the 
gentler  emotions — love,  luxury,  languor,  and  so  on.  Now 
while  it  is  true  as  a  fact  that  there  is  an  intimate  relation 
between  sound  and  sense,  there  is  no  reason  to  believe 
that  a  real  universal  language  exists  in  any  way  that  will 
allow  us  to  discover  it,  but  the  instinct  of  the  race,  guided 
by  its  intelligence,  may  develop  a  language  as  much 
superior  to  the  Greek  or  German  as  these  are  to  the  rude 
speech  of  the  Australian  savage.  Then  look  at  Volapuk. 
Here  we  have  a  universal  language  already  made,  and 
well  made  too.  See  how  many  adherents  it  has  already 
found,  although  it  has  been  in  existence  only  a  little  over 
six  years.  Whether  Volapuk  is  the  language  of  the  future 
I  do  not  know,  but  why  should  not  some  creation  of  the 
kind  be  adopted  by  the  universal  consent  of  the  civilized 
nations,  and  be  taught  in  public  schools,  and  used  in 
public  documents  and  private  international  transactions  ? 
Sir  O. — Alas  !  you  might  as  well  ask  :  "  Why 
should  not  man  become  suddenly  gifted  with  openness 
and  flexibility  of  mind  ? "  What  you  suggest  could 
never  come  to  pass,  because  the  scheme  would  imply 
that  men  are  under  the  influence  of  ideal  considerations 
far  more  then  they  really  are.     The  plan  is  too  taking 


86  GLIMPSES  OF  THE  FUTURE. 

and  logical  ever  to  be  adopted.  Moreover,  as  suggested, 
it  would  simply  mean  that  there  would  be  one  more  lan- 
guage to  learn,  for  although  a  Volapiik  might  conceivably 
be  adopted  for  certain  purposes  by  men  of  ideas,  it  could 
not  hope  to  supplant  the  mother  tongue  until  the  neces- 
sity for  a  universal  language  is  much  more  keenly  felt 
than  it  is  at  present  or  is  likely  to  be  in  the  next  two 
centuries.  After  all,  what  classes  of  people  would  need 
your  logical  language  ?  Only  travellers,  diplomatists,  and 
merchants,  hardly  one  one-hundredth  of  the  whole  popu- 
lation. Very  few  persons  need,  to  get  on  in  life,  more 
than  their  mother  tongue.  Then  there  would  be  the 
further  difficulty  about  the  selection  of  the  universal  lan- 
guage. If  ever  it  was  known  that  one  was  to  be  taught 
in  the  public  schools,  there  would  immediately  be  a 
thousand  candidates  for  the  place.  I  see  that  already 
Volapiik  has  two  or  three  rivals,  and  doubtless  more  may 
be  expected.  Who  is  to  decide  between  them  ?  A  con- 
gress of  philologists  ?  Who  can  doubt  that,  considering 
the  fact  that  philologists  themselves  would  be  the 
authors  of  all  the  candidates,  such  a  congress  would  be 
so  torn  by  internecine  warfare  that  no  decision  could  be 
come  to. 

Linguist. — But  would  not  such  a  language  be  de- 
sirable ? 

Sir  O. — Yes,  just  as  desirable  as  the  "  prevalency  of 
reason  and  the  will  of  God."  I  am  not,  however,  seeking 
for  the  desirable,  but  for  the  probable. 


THE  PROSPECT  EOR  ARCHITECTURE. 


Architect. — Up  to  a  recent  date  domestic  architec- 
ture in  this  country  was  of  a  sombre  and  monotonous 
character.  Our  first  private  houses  were  three  and  four 
stories  high,  and  the  fronts  were  of  brownstone.  It  was 
quiet  and  elegant,  but  the  general  effect  was  depressing. 
Lately  a  change  has  occurred.  The  centenary  of  our 
country,  celebrated  in  Philadelphia  in  1S76,  marked  a 
new  era,  not  only  in  house-construction,  but  in  the  inter- 
nal decoration  of  our  houses.  It  introduced  the  Queen 
Anne  and  other  quaint  as  well  as  artistic  forms  of  dwell- 
ing-houses. 

Sir  Oracle. — Yes,  and  I  notice  that  writers  on  art 
and  architecture  are  criticising  very  severely  this  revolt 
against  the  monotony  and  elegance  of  the  old-time 
brownstone  fronts. 

Architect. — All  revolutions  lead  to  some  excesses, 
and  that  some  members  of  my  profession  would  abuse 
their  liberty  when  they  found  patrons  who  would  stand 
by  them  was  to  be  expected.  Now  let  any  one  inspect 
the  houses  constructed  before  this  era  of  high  colors  and 
quaint  forms,  and  I  think  the  judgment  will  be  that  the 
architectural  beauty  of  the  city  has  been  enhanced  very 
greatly  by  our  more  advanced  architects.  No  one  can 
walk  up  Madison  Avenue,  east  of  the  Central  Park,  and 
look  to  the  right  and  left,  up  and  down  the  side  streets, 

S7 


88  GLIMPSES  OF  THE  FUTURE. 

without  feeling  grateful  to  those  who  have  effected  such 
attractive  changes  over  the  old  order  of  things.  A  per- 
son trained  in  the  earlier  canons  of  our  art  is  naturally 
disturbed  by  the  new  domestic  architecture  of  the  day. 
It  is  the  story  of  "  the  music  of  the  future  "  over  again  ; 
but  Wagner  will  outlive  his  critics,  and  the  newer  com- 
binations of  form  and  color  in  our  domestic  architecture 
will  be  justified  by  future  generations.  By  the  way, 
what  have  you  to  say  respecting  the  demand  for  a  dis- 
tinctively American  style  of  architecture  ? 

Sir  O. — The  architecture  of  the  ancient  world  clearly 
had  relation  to  the  different  nations  which  developed  the 
various  styles.  Art  is  of  all  countries,  and  is  a  heritage 
of  the  race,  but  it  manifests  itself  in  varied  forms  to 
different  peoples  and  ages.  Certainly  the  Egyptian  was 
not  like  the  Assyrian  or  the  Grecian.  The  Doric  and 
the  Ionic  were  separate  manifestations  to  different 
branches  of  the  Hellenes.  Architecture  down  to  modern 
times  represented  religious  ideals.  The  Egyptian  mauso- 
leum, the  Greek  temple,  the  Mohammedan's  mosque, 
and  the  Roman  Catholic  cathedral  were  all  embodiments 
of  certain  religious  conceptions.  Modern  times  have 
given  us  no  church  architecture  that  is  distinctive,  be- 
cause the  modern  world  has  developed  no  new  religion. 
Our  church  edifices  are  all  feeble  copies  of  Pagan,  Mo- 
hammedan, and  Roman  Catholic  houses  of  worship. 

Architect. — You  don't  quite  answer  my  query. 
Your  mission  is  to  outline  the  future.  Will  we  ever 
have  an  American  style  of  architecture  ? 

Sir  O. — I  was  coming  to  that.  Nearly  all  the  noble 
architecture  of  the  past  was  religious  ;  that  of  the  modern 
world  is  secular.  Modern  art  is  barren  in  dealing  with 
sacred  subjects  ;  it  now  serves  Humanity  instead  of  the 


THE  PROSPECT  FOR  ARCHITECTURE.         8g 

unseen  God.  The  Romans  built  the  amphitheatre  and 
the  bath  ;  the  moderns  erect  the  legislative  chamber, 
custom-house,  the  bank,  the  post-office,  and  last,  but  by 
no  means  least,  the  apartment  house.  The  temple  of 
the  Greek  was  for  Zeus,  Aphrodite,  or  Athene,  but  our 
noblest  edifices  are  to  house  those  who  have  been  fortu- 
nate in  the  accumulation  of  power  or  wealth.  It  is,  of 
course,  absurd  to  expect  a  type  of  an  American  house 
equally  suitable  for  Maine  and  Texas,  Dakota  and 
Florida.  Climate  is  an  important  factor  in  determining 
the  construction  of  abodes  for  human  beings.  This 
modern  mission  of  art  will,  I  think,  be  further  empha- 
sized in  providing  homes  for  the  masses  of  our  people. 
The  isolated  household,  which  gave  room  for  one  family, 
is  being  replaced  by  the  great  dwelling  suitable  for  a 
hundred  families.  It  is  not  well  for  man  to  live  alone. 
For  the  play  of  all  his  faculties  and  his  highest  culture 
it  is  better  for  him  to  be  surrounded  by  other  human 
beings,  who  have  something  to  give  in  the  daily  educa- 
tion of  life  as  well  as  to  receive.  I  venture  to  predict 
that  the  unitary  homes  will  continue  to  be  a  feature  in 
the  architecture  of  the  future.  The  skill,  taste,  and 
genius  of  architects  will  be  called  into  play  to  provide 
living  rooms  for  great  numbers  of  human  beings  in  one 
dwelling. 

Architect. — I  notice  that  some  of  the  critics  say  that 
the  Romans  subordinated  architecture  to  engineering. 

Sir  O. — In  doing  this  and  in  building  baths  and 
coliseums  the  Romans  took  the  first  step  to  serving  the 
race  instead  of  imaginary  gods.  The  temples  of  Nineveh, 
Babylon,  Egypt,  and  Greece  were  not  for  human  uses. 
Still  one  of  the  noblest  works  of  Phidias  was  the  treasure 
temple  of  Athene,  wherein  was  kept  the  money  of  Attica. 


90  GLIMPSES  OF  THE  FUTURE. 

But  in  those  heroic  times  life  and  treasure  were  alike 
supposed  to  belong  to  the  gods.  Those  illusions  have 
vanished  for  ever,  and  for  all  practical  purposes  it  is 
man  who  is  now  to  be  served  by  art.  There  can  be  no 
loss  of  dignity  in  submitting  to  the  inevitable,  and  art,  in 
serving  the  race  and  beautifying  our  habitations,  must 
submit  to  mechanical  conditions. 

Architect. — But  surely  the  members  of  my  profes- 
sion will  not  be  confined  to  providing  houses  for  the  few 
or  the  many?  Our  skill  will  be  sought  for  in  other 
public  works. 

Sir  O. — Yes,  the  same  revolution  which  "Wagner 
brought  about  in  music  is  imminent  in  architecture. 
His  theory  was  that  the  composer  should  be  many-sided. 
He  should  not  only  produce  the  music,  the  libretto,  the 
scenery,  the  action,  the  entire  ensemble,  but  all  its  details 
should  be  the  task  of  the  composer,  or  rather  of  the 
artist  A  work  of  art  should  be  a  whole  ;  hence  the 
architect  of  the  future  must  also  be  many-sided.  A 
great  house  should  be  a  perfect  poem,  and  all  its  details, 
from  the  original  plan  down  to  the  decorative  adorn- 
ments, ought  to  be  outlined  by  its  designer.  The  outlying 
grounds,  too,  should  be  his  conception.  The  laying-out 
of  a  landscape  and  great  engineering  works  should  be 
made  beautiful  by  the  artist,  who,  to  be  called  such, 
must  be  something  more  than  a  mere  planner  of  edifices, 
sacred  or  profane. 

Architect. — Alas,  where  will  the  men  of  genius  come 
from,  capable  of  being  artists  in  the  sense  in  which  you 
use  that  word  ? 

Sir  O. — They  must  be  men  of  general  ideas,  who  are 
not  tied  down  to  mere  technical  manipulation.  The 
real  artist  will  plan  the  work  in  its  general  features,  and. 


THE   PROSPECT  FOR  ARCHITECTURE.  9 1 

avail  himself  of  the  labors  of  specialists  to  reduce  his 
ideas  to  actualities. 

Architect. — Should  not  critics  treat  architects  ten- 
derly ?  Is  it  not  rather  disheartening,  when  one  has 
done  his  best,  to  be  held  up  to  public  contempt,  when 
perhaps  the  point  at  issue  is  a  mere  question  of  taste 
between  the  artist  and  his  critic  ? 

Sir  O. — The  average  critic  has  been  very  severe  upon 
painters  who  have  not  done  good  work.  Yet  these 
artists  put  their  pictures  in  a  gallery  modestly,  and  no 
one  need  go  to  see  them  unless  he  wants  to.  But  the 
architect  obtrudes  himself  upon  the  public  ;  his  work 
challenges  attention.  It  is  a  constant  and  ever-present 
example  of  good  or  evil  in  the  way  of  art.  Whoever 
plans  a  building  to  be  seen  of  all  men  may  as  well  under- 
stand first  as  last  that  he  will  be  subjected  to  the  most 
severe  judgment.  I  believe  our  architects  realize  their 
responsibility,  and  I  look  forward  to  a  great  development 
of  artistic  skill  as  applied  to  public  and  private  build- 
ings, and  the  great  engineering  works  intended  to  supply 
the  necessities  and  add  to  the  comforts  of  the  human 
race. 

Architect. — You  do  not  believe  then  in  any  dis- 
tinctively modern  style  of,  say,  church  architecture  ? 

Sir  O. — There  is  a  relation,  as  I  have  said  before,  be- 
tween the  creeds  or  faiths  and  the  architecture  to  which 
they  gave  birth.  The  Grecian  temple  was  designed  for 
the  procession  of  the  priests,  and  the  sacrifice  at  the 
altar.  In  other  words,  it  was  for  a  spectacle,  the  only 
music  being  chants.  The  Gothic  cathedral  was  for  the 
celebration  of  mass  and  for  music,  not  for  speaking. 
Preaching  demands  an  auditorium,  the  sound  of  the 
human  voice  being  the  first  condition  for  the  architect 


92  GLIMPSES  OF  THE  FUTURE. 

to  keep  in  mind.  Our  modern  church  architecture 
is  a  jumble  of  all  previous  styles.  The  symbolism  be- 
tween the  various  religions  and  their  church  architecture 
has  frequently  been  pointed  out. 

Architect. — But  will  not  the  race  develop  new  faiths, 
which  will  embody  themselves  in  appropriate  material 
forms  ? 

Sir  O. — Very  probably.  The  evolution  of  religion 
will  involve  many  changes.  Our  nobler  ideals  will  be 
embodied  in  the  "frozen  music  "  of  architecture.  But 
we  are  the  heirs  of  all  the  ages  ;  and  our  modern  aim 
seems  to  be  to  utilize  the  types  of  all  pre-existing  forms 
of  architecture,  sacred  and  secular.  Our  best  work  must 
not  be  in  erecting  temples  to  an  unknown  god  ;  but  in 
providing  the  most  artistic  habitations  that  will  serve  the 
material  and  artistic  wants  of  humanity.  The  triumphs 
of  the  modern  world  are  its  bridges,  depots,  markets, 
public  buildings,  palaces,  and  apartment  houses — in 
other  words,  all  the  edifices  which  serve  the  secular  pur- 
poses of  the  race,  as  well  as  those  which  satisfy  its 
religious  aspirations.  Hence  I  do  not  look  to  any  dis- 
tinctive American  style  of  architecture,  for  the  structures 
of  the  future  will  be  multiform.  They  will  utilize  all 
that  was  good  in  the  past,  as  well  as  invent  new  forms 
which  are  more  fitted  for  the  present.  The  temple  of 
humanity,  the  pantheons  of  the  future,  will  far  surpass 
any  thing  that  has  come  down  to  us  from  the  past. 


CONCEITS   ABOUT   THE   CURRENCY. 


Economist. — The  currency  question  will,  I  suppose, 
receive  some  sort  of  solution  during  the  next  century. 
Is  there  any  data  by  which  we  can  foreshadow  what  the 
final  result  will  be  ? 

Sir  Oracle. — It  seems  probable  to  me  that  before  the 
close  of  the  twentieth  century  there  will  be  a  unification 
of  the  coined  money  of  mankind.  Undoubtedly  the 
French  metric  system  of  weights  and  measures  will  be 
recognized  in  all  the  markets  of  the  world.  The  inti- 
mate trade  communications  between  nations,  which  will 
be  brought  about  by  telegraph  and  telephone  and  other 
more  efficient  motors,  will  probably  bring  into  existence 
a  decimal  currency,  which  will  be  recognized  in  all 
parts  of  the  civilized  world. 

Economist. — Will  it  be  necessary  to  use  the  precious 
metals  to  effect  exchanges  ?  Why  not  paper-yfo/-money  ? 
An  understanding  among  the  several  nations  of  the  world 
would  prevent  the  issue  of  too  much  currency  ;  and  the 
governments  would  soon  learn  about  how  much  was 
needed  to  transact  the  business  in  each  local  state.  As  I 
understand  it,  the  main  objection  to  paper-yfotf-money  in 
the  past  was  that  it  had  no  purchasing  power  outside  of  the 
nation  which  issued  it  or  was  responsible  for  it.  Hence 
the  dependence  on  gold  and  silver,  because  one  or  both 
of  these  metals  is  the  recognized  legal  tender  of  all  man- 
kind outside  of  the  savage  tribes. 

93 


94  GLIMPSES  OF  THE  FUTURE. 

Sir  O. — I  do  not  believe  the  time  will  ever  come  when 
a  piece  of  paper  representing  an  imaginary  dollar  will 
be  current  in  all  parts  of  the  world.  The  yfo/-money 
agitation  is  a  curious  instance  of  how  words  are  mistaken 
for  things.  As  a  matter  of  fact  a  dollar  is  so  many  grains 
of  gold  or  silver  ;  the  law  denning  the  proportion.  Hence 
the  basis  of  our  currency  is  a  physical  fact.  It  is  a  sub- 
stance which  has  weight  and  extension.  But  the  dollar 
of  the  Greenbacker  is  a  metaphysical  entity.  It  is  in- 
tangible ;  it  is  unaffected  by  the  law  of  gravitation  ;  and 
is  unmeasurable  by  any  mathematical  formula  You 
might  as  well  attempt  to  measure  values  by  a  dream  as 
by  a  fiat  dollar.  Mankind  has  not  yet  accepted  the  les- 
son taught  by  Hume  the  philosopher,  that  whatever  has 
neither  weight  nor  extension  is  nothing.  Time  and  time 
again  has  paper  money  been  issued,  based  upon  the  faith 
of  the  state,  and  irredeemable  in  the  precious  metals. 
The  result  has  always  been  disastrous.  The  paper  fiction 
is  invariably  killed  by  the  fact  that  you  cannot  exchange 
something  for  nothing. 

Economist. — It  is  an  axiom  in  political  economy  that 
all  trade  is  an  exchange  of  products, — money  being 
merely  the  measure  of  value  of  the  goods  bartered. 
Hence,  money  is  only  a  yardstick.  Will  not  the  inven- 
tive genius  of  man  hit  upon  some  way  of  effecting  ex- 
changes without  using  so  costly  a  machinery  as  that 
involved  in  the  constant  employment  of  the  precious 
metals.  Look,  for  instance,  at  the  many  devices  now 
employed  for  effecting  exchanges.  Time  was  when  the 
gold  and  silver  coin  had  to  be  moved  from  one  part  of 
the  earth  to  another  in  order  to  carry  on  trade.  But  the 
bill  of  exchange,  which  first  made  its  appearance  in  the 
Italian  republics  of  the  middle  ages,  dispensed  with  the 


CONCEITS  ABOUT  THE   CURRENCY.  95 

necessity  of  these  costly  and  dangerous  transfers  of  real 
money.  Then  the  institution  of  banks  involved  bank 
credits  and  checks  ;  and  now  we  have  telegraphic  trans- 
fers. So  that  we  have  only  to  pay  the  differences,  which 
is  a  comparatively  small  sum  compared  with  the  vast 
aggregate  of  transactions.  Note  the  clearing-houses  in 
our  large  cities.  They  economize  the  use  of  actual  cash 
enormously.  By  marking  of  debts  against  credits,  trans- 
actions involving  a  hundred  million  dollars  on  both 
sides  of  the  account  can  be  settled  with  the  transfer  of  a 
few  thousand  in  cash.  Now  is  it  unreasonable  to  suppose 
that  some  device  will  be  arrived  at  to  dispense  with  the 
use  of  actual  gold  and  silver  in  the  commerce  of  the 
world  ? 

Sir  O. — I  confess  I  once  thought  that  in  the  fulness 
of  time  mankind  might  agree  to  use  a  currency  based  on 
the  whole  arable  soil  of  the  earth.  I  can  never  get  rid  of 
the  idea  that  a  currency,  to  be  at  all  useful,  must  have 
some  reality  back  of  it.  A  word  such  as  a  dollar,  for 
instance,  is  nothing ;  but  the  soil  beneath  our  feet,  and 
from  which  with  labor  we  extract  all  that  we  eat  and 
wear,  would  not  be  open  to  the  objection  of  intangibility. 
A  currency  convertible  into  so  much  land  ought  to  have 
a  permanent  value  ;  but  of  course  this  was  a  mere  theory, 
and  perhaps  a  very  wild  one.  It  is  true  that  something 
like  this  was  tried  in  the  case  of  the  French  Assignats, 
and  it  was  a  dismal  failure  ;  but  my  scheme  would 
involve  the  agreement  of  all  nations,  and  would  have 
behind  it  the  authority  of  every  government  on  earth. 
In  this  year,  1888,  we  are  testing  a  new  departure  in  the 
way  of  currency.  We  are  making  use  of  paper,  based 
dollar  for  dollar  upon  actual  deposits  of  gold  and  silver 
in  the  government  treasury.     We  are  trying  to  use  paper 


g6  GLIMPSES  OF  THE  FUTURE. 

exclusively  for  all  sums  of  one  dollar  and  over.  I  con- 
fidently predict  that  there  is  trouble  in  store  for  us  in  this 
disuse  of  actual  gold  and  silver  coin.  After  a  few  years 
people  will  become  educated  to  paper  money  of  different 
denominations.  They  will  begin  to  say  that  it  is  absurd 
to  keep  permanently  locked  up  hundreds  of  millions  of 
gold  and  silver,  which,  if  not  used  as  currency,  ought  to 
be  available  for  the  arts.  The  tendency  of  mankind  to 
mistake  words  for  things  will  make  itself  felt  ;  and  the 
7fo/-money  theorists  will  again  come  to  the  front. 

Economist. — May  there  not  be  same  device  invented 
for  using  gold  and  silver  both  in  the  arts,  and  for  cur- 
rency purposes  ? 

Sir  O. — Perhaps.  The  necessities  of  trade  may  force 
the  bankers  and  merchants  of  the  future  to  hit  upon 
some  way  of  meeting  this  difficulty  when  it  arises,  as 
arise  it  will.  On  one  point  I  think  the  currency  theorists 
are  mistaken.  They  argue  that  the  use  of  bills  of  ex- 
change, bank  credits,  and  clearing-houses  does  away 
with  the  necessity  for  using  silver  as  well  as  gold  for  a 
measure  of  values  ;  but  the  steady  fall  in  prices  since  the 
partial  demonetization  of  silver,  and  the  consequent  dis- 
tress in  all  the  marts  of  trade,  is  proof  enough  for  me  that 
the  great  and  growing  commerce  of  the  world  demands 
not  only  all  the  gold  and  all  the  silver  that  is  procurable, 
but  all  the  paper  devices  as  well,  which,  while  tem- 
porarily taking  the  place  of  the  precious  metals,  are 
finally  convertible  into  them.  The  world  cannot  have 
too  much  real  money,  and  the  distress  in  all  departments 
of  industry  since  187 1  seems  to  me  to  be  due  to  the 
under-production  of  real  money,  at  a  time  when  there 
was  an  apparent  over-production  of  unsalable  goods. 

Economist. — You  speak  of  the  relative  over-produc- 


CONCEITS  ABOUT  THE   CURRENCY.  97 

tion.  Is  it  not  true  that  more  goods  are  often  produced 
than  the  world  has  need  for  ? 

Sir  O. — Since  man  has  been  upon  this  planet,  there 
was  never  a  time  when  there  was  too  much  food  or 
clothing  for  the  race.  There  are  always  millions  of  bare 
backs  and  hungry  bellies.  There  have,  of  course,  always 
been  certain  individuals  or  classes  which  had  more 
money  than  they  could  use  on  the  necessaries  of  life, 
but  the  economists  who  talk  of  over-production,  except 
in  a  relative  sense,  do  not  know  what  they  are  talking 
about.  The  problem  of  the  race  is  to  keep  on  producing 
until  there  is  food  and  clothing  and  shelter  for  all.  The 
very  best  that  mankind  can  expect  for  several  genera- 
tions is  that  their  barest  physical  necessities  will  be  satis- 
fied. The  problem  for  all  nations  is  to  feed  the  hungry 
and  to  clothe  the  naked.  Hence  I  have  regarded  all 
who  would  demonetize  either  gold  or  silver  as  the  ene- 
mies of  the  human  race,  for  the  under-production  of 
money  would  be  likely  to  bring  about  a  reaction  in 
prices,  which  may  put  a  stop  to  production. 

Economist. — But  let  us  "  return  to  our  muttons." 
You  have  not  yet  told  us  what  the  currency  of  the  twen- 
tieth century  will  be. 

Sir  O. — I  have  at  least  pointed  out  what  it  will  not  be. 
Paper-yfo/-money  has  no  future,  though  we  may  have  to 
undergo  another  terrible  experience  to  prove  that  fact. 
The  currency  of  the  future  will  be  based  on  something 
tangible,  not  on  an  idea  or  a  definition.  We  will  con- 
tinue to  employ  all  the  devices  now  in  use  to  economize 
and  utilize  the  precious-metal  reserve  of  the  world,  and 
doubtless  more  machinery  will  be  invented  having  this 
same  object  in  view.  I  think  something  will  happen  in 
the  next  ten  years  to  restore  silver  to  the  status  it  had 


98  GLIMPSES  OF  THE   FUTURE. 

when  bi-metallism  was  the  rule  on  the  continent  of 
Europe.  This  may  not  be  through  the  formal  remoneti- 
zation  of  silver  by  the  European  powers.  It  may  come 
about  through  the  enrichment  of  the  silver-using  people 
of  China,  Hindoostan,  Russia,  and  Central  and  South 
America.  We  should  remember  that  nine  tenths  of 
mankind  use  silver  exclusively,  and  if  the  gold  mono- 
metallic countries  keep  on  impoverishing  themselves  by 
their  monetary  policy,  the  silver-using  world  will  be  ad- 
vantaged, and  the  value  of  the  white  metal  will  go  back 
to  its  old  ratio  of  fifteen  and  one  half  to  one.  That  will 
mark  an  era  of  great  prosperity  throughout  the  world. 
The  improvement  of  the  physical  condition  of  the  people 
of  Russia,  China,  Hindostan,  and  South  America  is 
undeniable.  The  United  States  has  made  great  progress 
since  it  partially  remonetized  silver.  The  nation  which 
has  the  gloomiest  outlook  is  gold,  mono-metallic  Eng- 
land. That  country  is  losing  its  command  over  the 
markets  of  the  world,  and  London  its  pre-eminence  as 
the  banking  centre  of  international  commerce. 


TRUSTS,  CORPORATIONS,  AND  GOVERNMENT 
WORK. 


Merchant. — You  have  been  saying  that  trusts  are  a 
natural  evolution  from  pre-existing  industrial  conditions, 
and  that  on  the  whole  corporations  have  been  beneficial 
to  the  community  at  large.  Yet  almost  in  the  same 
breath  you  call  upon  the  government  to  do  many  things 
now  undertaken  by  corporations  because,  you  say,  the 
latter  are  monopolizing  and  care  more  for  their  officers 
and  stockholders  than  they  do  for  the  community. 

Sir  Oracle. — There  is  a  good  as  well  as  a  bad  side  to 
all  human  institutions.  The  association  of  capitalists  to 
perform  work  which  individuals,  however  rich,  have  not 
the  means  or  ability  to  do  is  an  excellent  thing  in  itself. 
But  when  organizations  of  this  kind  take  advantage  of 
their  positions  to  charge  exorbitant  profits  they  become 
a  detriment  to  the  public  weal.  A  corporation  to  build  a 
railroad  and  manage  it,  is,  under  our  modern  conditions, 
necessary,  and  ought  not  to  be  objectionable  ;  but  when 
these  same  organizations  bribe  legislatures  so  as  to  get 
special  privileges  and  charge  extravagant  freights  and 
fares  they  become  harmful  and  should  be  restrained. 
The  construction  of  the  first  transcontinental  railroads 
was  a  creditable  piece  of  work  in  itself,  but  when  the 
companies  charged  five  hundred  million  dollars  for  im- 
provements that  cost  them  less  than  a  hundred  million 

99 


IOO  GLIMPSES  OF  THE  FUTURE. 

dollars  they  became  a  gigantic  enemy  to  the  public.  The 
Credit  Mobilier,  the  construction  company  which  built 
the  Union  Pacific  roads,  in  addition  to  charging  alto- 
gether too  much  for  its  services  to  the  public,  corrupted 
Congress,  and  brought  disgrace  upon  many  statesmen 
who  held  high  positions.  It  is  this  abuse  of  corporate 
power  and  privileges  which  is  to  be  guarded  against  by  a 
free  press  and  an  enlightened  public  opinion. 

M. — Yet  I  see  you  are  constantly  arguing  that  the 
state  should  undertake  public  works  which  are  in  the 
nature  of  natural  monopolies.  You  have  often  said  you 
believed  that  the  great  corporation  of  the  nation  can  do 
some  things  very  much  better  than  associations  of  private 
persons  ;  but  is  it  not  true  that  governments  in  the  past 
have  proved  incompetent  to  manage  any  thing  like  busi- 
ness in  an  efficient  and  economical  way  ?  Is  not  the 
prejudice  against  its  doing  any  thing  beyond  keeping  the 
peace  founded  upon  the  bitter  experiences  of  the  past  ? 

Sir  O. — Again  the  rule  holds  good  that  all  human 
institutions  are  imperfect ;  they  work  well  for  a  time,  but 
their  shortcomings  make  their  appearance  eventually. 
The  history  even  of  religions  shows  that  they  have  their 
bad  as  well  as  their  good  influences.  In  one  age  the 
church  is  a  mighty  civilizing  influence,  in  a  succeeding 
generation  it  becomes  a  persecuting  agency  and  demoral- 
izes instead  of  elevating  the  race.  I  hold  that  any  gov- 
ernment is  better  than  no  government.  When  there  is 
danger  of  anarchy  mankind  instinctively  falls  back  on 
despotism  as  preferable.  Now,  as  a  matter  of  fact,  gov- 
ernments have  proved  very  efficient  in  many  great  de- 
partments of  human  activity.  Take  war,  for  instance, 
which  has  been  the  main  business  of  mankind  since  the 
beginning  of  history,  what  could  individuals  or  private 


TRUSTS.  IOI 

confederations  do  if  pitted  against  the  armies  of  an  orga- 
nized state  ?  Mankind  naturally  honors  great  monarchs 
and  able  ministers  and  statesmen,  for  such  rulers  are  the 
very  salt  of  the  earth. 

M. — But  let  us  come  down  to  particulars.  What  kind 
of  works  can  governments  do  better  than  private  corpo- 
rations ? 

Sir  O. — Corporate  enterprises  generally  have  a  selfish 
aim.  Their  great  object  is  to  make  money  or  to  secure 
power  for  the  officers  or  stockholders  interested.  Gov- 
ernments, after  all,  must  have  public  objects  in  view,  they 
are  under  no  obligation  to  do  business  for  a  profit,  hence 
they  are  so  far  disinterested.  True,  their  agents  may  be 
dishonest  and  may  abuse  their  positions  to  exploit  the  com- 
munity. History  is  full  of  such  abuses  on  the  part  of 
those  in  authority.  Take  a  familiar  instance  and  compare 
the  work  of  a  government  and  that  of  a  corporation.  How 
wonderfully  cheap  and  efficient  is  our  post-office  depart- 
ment !  The  same  remark  is  true  of  all  post-offices  in  all 
organized  modern  communities.  How  rarely  does  a  let- 
ter miscarry  and  how  trifling  is  the  cost  of  sending  one. 
Express  companies  in  this  country  undertake  a  some- 
what similar  work.  They  are  efficient,  it  is  true,  but  very 
much  more  costly.  How  heavy  are  the  charges  for  pack- 
ages sent  to  any  distance  !  In  Great  Britain  and  on  the 
Continent  the  post-office  departments  undertake  to  do  the 
work  performed  by  the  express  companies  in  this  coun- 
try, but  the  charges  for  packages  and  goods  sent  is  not 
one  tenth  the  sums  paid  to  our  express  companies.  The 
governments  of  Great  Britain,  France,  Belgium,  and  Hol- 
land do  not  want  to  make  any  profit  in  performing  a 
public  service,  but  our  express  companies  are  owned  by 
stockholders  who  must  have  their  dividends.     Then  each 


102  GLIMPSES  OF  THE   FUTURE. 

organization  has  its  officers,  clerks,  messengers,  and 
agents,  all  of  whom  are  well  paid.  A  great  deal  of  this 
money  is  saved  when  government  undertakes  the  task  of 
sending  packages  through  the  post-office.  Any  one  who 
has  travelled  abroad  is  struck  with  the  curious  fact  that 
the  post-office  delivers  barrels  of  flour  and  potatoes,  car- 
cases of  animals,  huge  cheeses,  assortments  of  goods  of 
all  kinds  on  which  are  charges  of  less  than  the  ordinary 
freight  rates  of  the  railroads — for  governments  can  make 
better  bargains  with  transportation  lines  than  can  .private 
individuals  or  corporations. 

M. — What  other  departments  of  business  could  govern- 
ment occupy  with  advantage  to  the  community  ? 

Sir  O. — The  telegraphic  service  abroad  is  more  efficient 
and  cheaper  than  the  same  work  done  in  this  country  by 
corporations.  Then  on  the  Continent  it  is  the  govern- 
ments which  generally  own  and  control  the  railroads. 

M. — There  you  must  confess  that  the  private  corpora- 
tions of  Great  Britain  and  the  United  States  show  to  ad- 
vantage with  government  ownership  and  control. 

Sir  O. — I  don't  admit  any  thing  of  the  kind.  It  is 
quite  true  that  the  railroad  corporations  are  more  enter- 
prising than  government  officials  are  likely  to  be.  They 
give  better  cars,  swifter  trains,  and  sometimes  cheaper 
service  ;  but  roads  managed  by  a  responsible  government, 
such  as  that  of  Germany  or  Belgium,  are  safer  to  travel 
on,  and  are  very  much  cheaper  in  the  matter  of  freight. 
It  is  a  standing  complaint  of  the  English  manufacturers 
that  their  German  rivals  have  a  great  advantage  over 
them  because  the  government  of  that  country  favors 
trade  in  every  way,  whereas  the  English  railroad  corpora- 
tions think  mainly  of  profit.  But  the  community  benefits 
enormously  in  another  way  by  government  ownership  of 


TRUSTS.  IO3 

the  transportation  lines.  The  profits  in  running  the 
railway  system  find  their  way  into  the  national  treasury, 
which  helps  to  reduce  all  taxation.  This  is  why  Germany 
can  maintain  such  a  mighty  army,  for  the  money  which 
adds  to  the  strength  of  that  state,  in  this  country  and 
England  is  poured  into  the  coffers  of  private  capitalists. 
There  are  no  Jay  Goulds  or  Vanderbilts  or  great  railroad 
millionaires  in  Germany,  or  indeed  anywhere  on  the 
Continent.  We  impoverish  the  national  treasury  to  add 
to  the  fortunes  of  private  individuals. 

M. — You  think,  then,  that  the  city  authorities  in  the 
future  will  do  many  things  now  relegated  to  private  cor- 
porations ? 

Sir  O. — When  we  have  civil-service  reform  and  elec- 
toral reform  I  have  no  doubt  but  that  our  cities  will  do 
many  things  which  now  would  be  regarded  as  out  of 
their  sphere.  What,  after  all,  is  more  efficient  than  our 
fire  and  police  departments  ;  then  look  at  our  Croton 
water  supply  ;  even  our  street-cleaning  bureau  does  its 
work  very  well.  Our  health  board  promises  to  do  excel- 
lent service.  Compare  these  city  departments  with  the 
gas  services,  the  horse-car  lines,  or  the  ferries.  The  cor- 
porations they  represent  overcharge  and  abuse  the  pub- 
lic in  every  way.  If  the  city  of  New  York  had  its  own 
gas  service  ;  if  it  owned  the  electric  lights  it  uses,  the 
ferries  and  the  horse-car  lines,  it  would  have  paid  up  its 
debt  and  had  a  hundred  million  to  its  credit.  When 
any  one  talks  of  the  inefficiency  of  the  general  govern- 
ment, or  of  the  city,  it  would  be  well  to  call  to  mind  our 
post-office  department,  our  police,  our  fire,  and  our 
water  supply  right  here  in  New  York.  Of  course,  it 
would  be  absurd  for  government  to  engage  in  trade.  It 
cannot  manufacture  or  distribute  goods,  but  it  ought  to 


104  GLIMPSES  OF  THE   FUTURE. 

control  all  natural  monopolies  and  those  departments  of 
human  activity  in  which  there  can  never  be  any  com- 
petition. 

M. — I  suppose  the  moral  of  this  conversation  is  that 
the  tendency  of  things  is  towards  the  assumption  of  new 
duties  by  the  nation,  the  state,  and  the  city.  In  other 
words,  centralization  is  the  watchword  of  the  future — all 
public  work  to  be  done  by  the  public  authorities. 

Sir  O. — That  would  seem  to  be  the  lesson  taught  by 
current  events. 


WHAT  WILL  BECOME  OF  THE  MIDDLE 
CLASSES  ? 


Trader. — From  remarks  in  various  of  your  conversa- 
tions I  judge,  Sir  Oracle,  it  is  your  belief  that  the  wealth 
of  the  nation  is  passing  into  fewer  hands,  and  that  in  the 
fulness  of  time  the  community  will  be  divided  mainly 
into  two  unequal  classes — a  few  very  rich  people,  a  vast 
mass  of  wage-receivers,  and,  compared  with  the  present, 
a  relatively  small  middle  class. 

Sir  Oracle. — Yes,  that  states  pretty  fairly  my  forecast 
of  what  will  result  from  the  trade  and  industrial  changes 
which  are  now  going  on.  It  seems  to  me  the  tendency 
is  to  increase  the  number  of  actual  workers  and  to  do 
away  with  the  necessity  for  so  many  manufacturers, 
merchants,  and  brokers.  The  big  fish  in  the  business 
world  are  eating  up  the  little  ones.  Of  course  this  re- 
mark does  not  apply  to  the  professional,  literary,  and 
artistic  classes.  We  shall  always  want  plenty  of  lawyers, 
doctors,  writers,  and  artists.  Their  influence  also  will 
increase  as  the  numbers  and  importance  of  the  middle 
class  decrease.  Auguste  Comte,  you  remember,  in  his 
scheme  of  a  new  society,  made  the  poets,  artists,  and 
philosophers  priests  of  humanity.  They  were  not  to 
have  wealth,  but  were  to  control  or  rather  represent 
public  opinion,  and  stand  between  the  patricians  who 
own  the  wealth  and  the  plebeians  who  did  the  work  of 

105 


106  GLIMPSES  OF  THE  FUTURE. 

the  world,  proclaiming  to  each  the  doctrine  of  duty  and 
setting  before  both  higher  ideals  of  life  than  those  sug- 
gested by  their  business  experiences  or  egotistic  pro- 
pensities. 

Trader. — All  this  is  a  dream.  What  makes  you 
think  the  middle  class  is  passing  away  relatively,  a  few 
becoming  very  rich,  but  the  bulk  dropping  back  into  the 
ranks  of  labor  ? 

Sir  O. — It  seems  to  me  that  every  modern  improve- 
ment and  all  the  inventions  of  the  age  tend  to  cheapen 
exchanges  and  to  reduce  profits.  We  once  had  a  class 
of  wealthy  tea  merchants  in  the  United  States.  The 
difference  in  price  between  Hong  Kong  and  Boston 
often  gave  a  fortune  to  the  trader  who  put  his  venture  into 
one  shipload.  But  the  extension  of  the  electric  cable  to 
China  put  an  end  forever  to  exceptionally  large  profits, 
for  the  Chinese  seller  knew  to  a  penny  the  price  of  tea 
in  all  the  markets  of  the  world  as  well  as  the  European 
and  American  buyer  did.  Electric  international  communi- 
cation has  cut  down  profits  in  trade  in  every  direction. 
Steam  communication  has  had  the  same  effect.  The 
marked  feature  of  this  age  of  trade  and  competition  is 
the  smaller  margin  of  profit  both  for  manufacturer  and 
merchant,  as  well  as  for  all  who  stand  between  the 
actual  producer  and  the  actual  consumer. 

Trader. — Does  it  not  seem  to  you  an  undesirable 
state  of  things  when  wealth  is  massed  in  fewer  hands 
and  the  bulk  of  the  middle  class  is  forced  to  go  to  work, 
while  those  that  remain  will  not  be  paid  more  than  the 
better  class  of  workingmen  ? 

Sir  O. — Our  conversations  will  not  alter  the  facts,  nor 
is  it  my  business  either  to  deplore  or  look  hopefully  on 
the  tendencies  of  things.     The  moral  of  the  situation  is 


THE  MIDDLE   CLASSES.  107 

that  society  should  look  favorably  on  all  measures  which 
would  raise  the  standard  of  comfort  of  the  working  or 
wage-receiving  classes.  Their  bitterest  enemies  to-day 
are  these  same  middle-class  people — that  is,  the  small 
employers  of  labor,  whether  manufacturers  or  merchants. 
It  is  they  who  favor  long  hours  of  labor  and  low  wages, 
and  who  have  made  the  daily  press  solid  against  the  best 
interests  of  the  working  classes. 

Trader. — Still  you  have  not  proved  your  point,  that 
the  middle  class  is  disappearing.  Every  poor  man  in 
the  West  who  takes  up  a  homestead  or  goes  in  debt  for  one 
hundred  arid  sixty  acres  of  land  in  time  becomes  one  of 
the  middle  class.  With  every  new  town  or  settlement 
there  grow  up  land-owners,  merchants,  and  manufac- 
turers, who  are  constantly  recruiting  the  same  class. 

Sir  O. — What  you  say  is  true  enough.  And  the 
middle  class  will  be  recruited  in  the  ways  you  men- 
tion for  the  next  thirty  to  fifty  years  ;  but  I  insist  that 
the  larger  commercial  movements  of  the  age  in  all  civi- 
lized countries  are  tending  to  mass  wealth  in  fewer 
hands  and  to  decrease  the  numbers  and  influence  of  the 
middle  classes.  Look  at  the  great  stores  in  all  the  capi- 
tals of  the  world  !  The  public  was  startled,  when  it  was 
first  stated  that  A.  T.  Stewart's  store,  when  he  was  alive, 
represented  over  five  hundred  bankrupted  tradesmen. 
But  now,  instead  of  one  Stewart  store,  there  are  probably 
five  hundred,  taking  in  the  leading  capitals  of  the  world. 
These  have  driven  out  the  small  storekeeper,  because 
they  can  give  a  better  article  for  a  lower  price.  Then 
what  is  the  meaning  of  the  great  corporation  and  the 
trust — the  latter  a  business  development  of  the  past  few 
years  ?  These — wielding  great  capital — can  serve  the 
community  more  efficiently  and  more  cheaply  than  can  a 


108  GLIMPSES  OF  THE   FUTURE. 

swarm  of  manufacturers  and  merchants  with  their 
retainers.  The  trust,  as  I  have  pointed  out,  is  a  labor- 
saving  machine.  One  Standard  Oil  Company  replaces 
two  or  three  thousand  superfluous  and  costly  middle- 
men. The  brain-work  of  the  business  world  is  destined 
in  time  to  be  represented  by  a  very  few  great  firms,  who 
will  practically  be  in  control  of  the  wealth  of  the  several 
nations. 

Trader. — I  judge  you  are  too  sweeping  in  your  gen- 
eralizations. Surely  the  world  has  been  civilized  mainly 
by  the  middle  class.  It  is  they  who  gave  us  the  Italian 
Republics  of  the  Middle  Ages,  who  liberalized  Europe, 
and  who  have  been  the  mainstay  of  our  own  republican 
institutions.  The  aim  of  the  German  Empire  is  to  devel- 
op its  manufacturing  and  mercantile  classes  ;  and  the 
great  want  of  Russia  is  a  wealthy  middle  class  above  the 
peasants,  one  capable  of  influencing  the  official  and 
court  life  of  the  Russian  government. 

Sir  O. — Still  the  economic  fact  remains  that  the  great 
class  which  has  stood  between  the  producers  and  con- 
sumers, helping  neither  and  living  off  of  both,  has  been, 
as  it  were,  a  sponge  absorbing  the  wealth  of  the  country, 
and  using  it  for  their  own  selfish  purposes.  The  man 
who  lives  on  rents,  on  the  dividends  of  railroad  compa- 
nies and  corporations,  who  lends  his  money  out  at  inter- 
est, who  makes  goods  or  sells  them  in  a  small  way,  is 
substantially  a  parasite.  He  toils  not,  neither  does  he 
spin  ;  but  in  past  ages  he  has  been  the  favored  member 
of  society.  Now  I  do  not  say  this  in  any  communistic 
sense,  for  these  middlemen  have  been  necessary  in  their 
time  and  have  helped  forward  the  evolution  of  the  race. 
They  have  been  the  patrons  of  literature  and  art  ;  and 
the  mainstay  of  much  of  the  civilization  of  the  world. 


THE   MIDDLE    CLASSES.  IO9 

But  they  have  had  more  than  their  proper  share  of  the 
property  of  the  community.  They  have  thriven  at  the  ex- 
pense of  the  real  producers  of  the  wealth  of  the  world. 
The  English  Parliament,  for  instance,  has  represented 
the  aristocratic  and  trading  classes  of  Great  Britain  down 
to  within  a  few  years.  Its  legislation  in  regard  to  the 
wages  of  labor,  is  difficult  to  characterize.  It  has  been 
contemptibly  mean  for  fully  six  hundred  years.  For 
proof  of  this  statement,  read  Gunton's  "  Wealth  and 
Progress."  But  the  point  I  wish  to  make  is  that  when 
labor  is  properly  remunerated  there  will  be  smaller  profits 
for  the  middle  classes.  Then,  I  think,  the  workers  can 
make  better  terms  with  the  millionaires  and  the  billion- 
aires than  they  have  been  able  to  do  with  the  owners  of 
thousands. 


ANENT  THE  LABOR  QUESTION. 


Knight  of  Labor. — Suppose  we  discuss  the  labor 
question,  not  with  a  view  to  taking  sides  for  or  against 
either  the  workingmen  or  their  employers  ;  but  to  try 
and  think  out  if  possible  what  the  wage  receivers  may 
expect  to  happen  to  them  in  the  future. 

Sir  Oracle. — It  will  be  difficult  to  discuss  this  mat- 
ter impartially  without  running  counter  to  very  strong 
prejudices  ;  but  I  will  try  to  look  at  the  facts  just  as  they 
are.  There  is  undoubtedly  a  feeling  among  the  people 
who  do  the  world's  work  that  their  condition  ought  to 
be  bettered.  They  see  a  great  growth  of  wealth  ;  and  a 
marvellous  number  of  new  inventions  for  economizing 
labor.  They  think  that  they  ought  to  be  better  treated. 
Now,  as  a  matter  of  fact,  the  condition  of  the  working 
people  has  been  greatly  improved  in  the  last  fifty  years. 
They  are  better  fed,  housed,  and  clothed  than  were  their 
forefathers.  Their  children  are  educated  at  public  ex- 
pense ;  and  they  have  more  art  and  recreative  advantages. 
Still  they  are  any  thing  but  satisfied.  They  are,  in  fact, 
discontented.  Hence  there  is  a  dangerous  ferment 
among  them  in  all  modern  civilized  countries.  Our  busi- 
ness is  to  try  and  tell  what  the  outcome  of  all  this  will  be. 

K.  of  L. — The  workingmen,  you  will  bear  in  mind, 
were  the  first  to  call  into  question  the  theories  of  the 
English    political  economists.     They  found    that    unre- 


ANENT   THE  LABOR   QUESTION.  Ill 

stricted  competition  was  for  them  simply  murderous. 
The  Parliamentary  investigations  as  to  the  mining  and 
manufacturing  population  of  England,  when  laissez-faire 
had  full  swing,  is  one  of  the  most  hideous  pages  in  the 
industrial  history  of  the  race.  For  self-protection  the 
workmen  were  forced  to  organize  trades-unions.  They 
did  so,  not  only  against  the  bitter  opposition  of  the  po- 
litical economists,  but  of  the  whole  literary  class.  The 
pages  of  the  English  journals  for  nearly  fifty  years  teemed 
with  libels  on  the  workingmen  and  their  trade  organi- 
zations. This  animosity  has  been  paralleled  of  late  years 
by  the  press  of  the  United  States,  which  is  always  on  the 
side  of  the  capitalist.  But  in  England,  Parliament  finally 
moved  in  the  matter,  and  notwithstanding  the  opposition 
of  the  employers  and  the  political  economists,  the  latter 
headed  by  names  so  distinguished  as  John  Bright  and 
Richard  Cobden,  laws  were  passed  prohibiting  child- 
labor  ;  limiting  the  number  of  hours  men  or  women 
might  toil  ;  and  finally  legalizing  the  organizations  of 
the  trades-unions.  Fifty  years  ago,  the  English  working- 
man  labored  fifteen  or  sixteen  hours  a  day.  Nine  hours 
and  a  half  a  day  is  now  the  legal  limitation.  Yet  the 
industry  of  England  has  prospered  during  all  that  time. 
But  there  is  danger  that  the  trades-unions  have  a  hard 
time  before  them.  They  have  undertaken  to  be  charita- 
ble societies,  and  to  maintain  their  members  while  sick 
and  out  of  work.  As  a  consequence,  they  have  been 
greatly  weakened.  The  Knights  of  Labor,  as  you  know, 
have  been  organized  to  do  for  the  unskilled  laborers 
what  the  trades-unions  have  done  for  the  skilled  artisans. 
By  uniting  all  classes  of  unskilled  workmen  it  was  hoped 
that  the  whole  mass  could  be  elevated. 

Sir  O. — And  you  have  found   that  so  far  the  experi- 


I  I  2  GLIMPSES   OF  THE  FUTURE. 

ment  has  been  a  failure.  The  press  has  been  opposed 
to  you  ;  and  the  great  "  sympathetic  "  strikes  have  mis- 
carried. 

K.  of  L. — What  is  your  solution  of  the  labor  problem  ? 

Sir  O. — I  hardly  like  to  state  it,  for  it  may  be  a  Utopia. 
I  have  had  the  notion  that  perhaps  a  religion  of  human- 
ity was  necessary  to  affect  so  vast  a  body  as  the  wage 
receivers,  who  indeed  form  the  bulk  of  our  population.  I 
feel  quite  clear  that  laissez-faire — the  doctrine  of  every 
one  for  himself  and  the  devil  take  the  hindmost — is  not  a 
solution  of  the  question,  nor  is  trades-unionism,  for 
while  these  labor  organizations  have  done  some  good  in 
Great  Britain  and  the  United  States,  they  do  not  help 
the  unskilled  workman,  and  often  are  as  unjust  and 
arbitrary  in  their  actions  as  are  the  capitalists  who  em- 
ploy them.  So  far  you  Knights  of  Labor  have  made  but 
small  progress. 

K.  of  L. — There  is  cooperation  ;  what  have  you  to 
say  to  that  ? 

Sir  O. — So  far  cooperation  has  been  successful  only 
in  the  field  of  distribution  ;  but  it  has  been  of  no  value 
even  in  that  province  outside  of  England.  Retail  trade 
in  England,  Wales,  and  Scotland  was  in  an  unnatural 
state.  The  aristocratic  way  of  doing  business  involved 
long  credits.  The  goods  for  household  use  in  great 
families  were  bought  by  housekeepers  and  stewards. 
This  involved  "  tips  "  and  bad  credits.  Consequently 
inordinate  prices  were  charged.  Here  was  the  chance 
for  the  cooperative  store.  By  adopting  the  cash  prin- 
ciple, abolishing  all  commissions  and  "  tips,"  buying 
goods  by  wholesale,  it  could  furnish  its  membership  with 
groceries  and  other  commodities  at  very  cheap  rates, 
and  even  then  make  very  good  profits.     Thus  they  were 


ANENT   THE  LABOR    QUESTIOX.  I  1 3 

enabled  to  turn  their  capital  several  times  a  year,  while 
the  old  retail  concerns  could  not  turn  theirs  more  than 
once.  A.  T.  Stewart  introduced  about  the  same  method 
of  transacting  business  into  the  United  States,  and  this 
has  effectually  prevented  the  success  of  the  cooperative 
store  among  us.  They  have  been  tried  a  thousand 
times,  and  have  always  failed.  His  principle  was  one 
price,  and  for  cash.  This  is  why  trade  has  been  centring 
in  our  large  capitals  in  concerns  like  Wanamaker's,  of 
Philadelphia ;  Macy's  and  Ridley's,  in  New  York,  and 
Jordan  &  Marsh,  in  Boston.  When  you  can  get  a  good 
article  for  a  low  price  in  a  retail  store,  there  is  no  open- 
ing for  a  cooperative  establishment.  The  latter  always 
labors  under  the  disadvantage  of  having  many  managers. 
Councils  of  war  can  never  conduct  campaigns  as  well  as 
generals  who  understand  their  business  ? 

K.  of  L. — But  would  it  not  be  desirable  if  all  labor 
could  be  organized  on  a  cooperative  basis. 

Sir  O. — The  one  business  that  man  has  pursued  since 
the  beginning  of  his  history  has  been  killing  his  neigh- 
bors in  war.  He  has  found  that  to  do  this  successfully 
he  must  have  leadership.  A  dozen  able  generals  in  con- 
sultation are  not  as  efficient  as  one  bad  general  having 
supreme  control.  The  organization  of  the  army  has 
been  found  desirable  not  only  in  the  state,  but  in  all  in- 
dustry. When  armies  command  their  generals  and  ship 
crews  their  captains,  I  will  believe  in  cooperation,  but 
not  until  then.  But  practically  in  productive  industry 
it  is  safe  to  say  that  cooperation  has  never  succeeded. 

K.  of  L. — Would  it  not  be  desirable  if  it  were  feasible  ? 

Sir  O. — I  have  never  thought  so.  Productive  co- 
operation would  involve  the  organization  of  groups  of 
skilled  workmen,  who  would  produce  goods  in  order  to 


114  GLIMPSES  OF  THE  FUTURE. 

get  all  the  profits,  which  now  go  to  the  capitalist  or 
middleman.  It  would  affect  only  a  small  minority  of 
the  working  classes.  Unskilled  labor  would  be  left  out 
in  the  cold  altogether.  The  curse  of  our  present  com- 
petitive system  is  that  the  able,  the  enterprising,  and  the 
lucky,  by  a  process  of  selection,  are  sifted  out  to  become 
rich  at  the  expense  of  the  rest  of  the  community.  Suc- 
cessful cooperation  would  merely  add  to  the  number  of 
these  lucky  ones.  No  solution  of  the  labor  problem  is 
worth  any  thing  which  does  not  favorably  affect  the  whole 
body  of  wage  receivers. 

K.  of  L. — I  suppose  that  is  why  you  favor  laws  redu- 
cing the  hours  of  labor,  and  those  which  affect  the  san- 
itary conditions  of  towns  and  factories,  as  well  as  those 
which  provide  for  the  education  of  the  common  people  ? 

Sir  O.— Yes,  the  tendencies  of  governmental  action  is 
to  benefit  the  mass  of  the  community,  hence  free  roads, 
recreative  parks,  public  libraries,  and  art  galleries.  The 
nation  must  concern  itself  with  the  well-being  of  the 
community,  and  is  doing  so  in  all  civilized  countries. 

K.  of  L. — What  have  you  to  say  about  socialistic 
schemes  ? 

Sir  O. — I  doubt  if  any  change  in  the  machinery  of 
society  is  practicable.  I  said  something  about  a  religion 
of  humanity  at  the  beginning  of  this  conversation. 
What  I  meant  was  that  there  should  be  a  change  of 
public  feeling  ;  that  the  capitalist  should  be  told  that 
the  wealth  he  held  was  not  entirely  his  own.  It  repre- 
sented the  accumulated  toil  of  many  men.  Hence  the 
Jay  Goulds,  Vanderbilts,  and  Astors  should  consider 
themselves  the  trustees  of  society.  They  should  use 
their  wealth  for  social  ends.  They  are  not  asked  to  be 
charitable,  but  only  that  their  wealth  should  be  so  used 


A N EN T  THE   LABOR    QUESTION.  1 1 5 

as  to  keep  people  employed,  irrespective  of  the  necessi- 
ties of  the  workmen.  If  there  was  a  public  opinion  to 
enforce  this  view  upon  our  employing  class,  the  labor 
question  would  be  solved.  There  would  be  no  necessity 
for  cooperation,  trades-unions,  or  Knights  of  Labor. 

K.  of  L. — Does  not  this  look  like  a  Utopia  again  ? 

Sir  O. — Perhaps  you  are  right.  We  can  only  judge 
the  future  by  the  past.  The  better  condition  of  the 
laboring  people  has  been,  in  large  part,  due  to  direct 
government  action  in  shortening  the  hours  of  labor. 
The  great  mechanical  inventions  of  the  age  have  also 
helped  :  but  I  do  not  see  that  cooperative  or  socialistic 
machinery  can  be  depended  upon  to  improve  the  condi- 
tion of  the  toiling  masses.  The  instinct  of  the  common 
laborer  is  right.  He  wants  more  pay  for  fewer  hours  of 
labor.  Our  industrial  history  shows  that  as  the  hours  of 
work  have  been  shortened  the  price  of  labor  has 
advanced. 


AS  TO  IRRIGATION. 


Nevadian. — I  see  that  Major  Powell  is  urging  one  of 
the  committees  of  the  House  of  Representatives  to 
recommend  an  appropriation  for  testing  a  national  sys- 
tem of  irrigation  in  the  region  between  the  Missouri 
River  and  the  Pacific  Ocean.  He  thinks  the  time  has 
come  when  great  reservoirs  should  be  established  to  col- 
lect water,  wherewith  to  fertilize  the  now  sterile  hundreds 
of  millions  of  acres  in  the  far  West. 

Sir  Oracle. — This  would  be  a  very  wise  thing  to  do, 
but  I  fear  it  will  not  be  attempted  in  our  generation.  Any 
one  who  has  travelled  in  Colorado,  Utah,  Nevada,  Ari- 
zona, New  Mexico,  or  California  must  have  been  struck 
with  the  magical  results  of  irrigation.  Take  the  valley, 
for  instance,  in  which  Salt  Lake  City  is  situated.  Noth- 
ing could  have  been  more  forbidding  than  the  character 
of  the  ground  before  the  waters  were  collected  from  the 
snow-clad  surrounding  mountains  to  give  life  and  beauty 
to  the  parched  and  burning  soil.  That  once  sterile  val- 
ley is  now  a  fruitful  garden  of  all  kinds  of  vegetation. 

Nev. — This  being  so,  why  should  not  the  people  of 
the  United  States  be  willing  to  add  to  the  national 
wealth  by  entering  upon  the  work  of  collecting  the 
waters  with  a  view  of  utilizing  them  for  agricultural  pur- 
poses ?  Every  ten  dollars  so  spent  would  add  a  thousand 
to  the  actua]  wealth  of  the  country. 


AS    TO   IRRIGATION.  WJ 

Sir  O. — The  political  training  of  the  American  people 
makes  it  impossible  for  any  government  which  repre- 
sents their  views  to  engage  in  any  such  vast  works  of 
public  utility.  To  achieve  the  best  results  this  must  be 
a  national  work.  Neither  the  snow-clad  mountains  nor 
the  arid  plains  of  the  West  pay  any  attention  to  State 
lines.  The  work  cannot  be  efficiently  done  by  local  or- 
ganizations, either  county  supervisors  or  States.  Yet  what 
an  outcry  would  be  raised  if  it  was  proposed  that  the 
general  government  should  undertake  this  enterprise  ! 
All  the  States  east  of  the  Missouri  and  Mississippi 
rivers  would  object  to  being  taxed  for  inaugurating  such 
irrigating  works,  although  it  could  be  easily  proved  that 
they  would  repay  the  outlay  one  hundred  times  over. 
Then  how  our  fool  newspaper  editors  would  roar  with  in- 
dignation at  the  possibility  that  the  politicians,  aided  by 
the  contractors,  might  do  some  stealing  !  True,  if  private 
enterprise  should  undertake  the  business  the  loss  to  the 
community  would  be  fifty  times  greater  ;  but  any  con- 
sideration such  as  that  would  be  beneath  the  notice  of 
our  journalists. 

Nev. — I  suppose  we  shall  have  to  depend  on  private 
enterprise.  Companies  will  be  formed  which  will  collect 
water  to  irrigate  certain  regions  ;  but  the  work  will  lack 
system,  and  give  birth  to  monstrous  and  hateful  monop- 
olies. Any  such  thing  as  competition  would  necessarily 
be  out  of  the  question.  The  companies  supplying  the 
water  can  make  their  own  terms,  and  the  farmers  will  be 
their  slaves.  All  the  arguments  against  land  monopoly 
apply  with  even  greater  force  to  water  monopoly  of  this 
kind. 

Sir  O. — Among  the  improvements  of  the  past  which 
have  come  down  to  us  are  the  irrigating  works  in  India, 


Il8  GLIMPSES  OF  THE  FUTURE. 

some  of  the  islands  of  the  Pacific,  and  in  various  parts  of 
Asia.  Great  Britain  is  doing  a  good  work  in  recon- 
structing some  of  the  old  reservoirs  and  aqueducts  of 
the  Indian  peninsula.  The  ancient  Egyptians  con- 
structed artificial  lakes  and  reservoirs  to  receive  the  sur- 
plus waters  of  the  Nile  when  the  flood  was  excessive,  to 
be  utilized  in  dryer  seasons.  We  should  do  this  with 
our  own  Ohio  and  Mississippi.  It  would  add  thou- 
sands of  millions  to  the  agricultural  value  of  the  lands  of 
the  Ohio  and  Mississippi  valleys  if  our  government  fol- 
lowed the  example  set  by  the  monarchs  of  Egypt  thou- 
sands of  years  ago  ;  but  it  shows  the  force  of  powerful 
illusions  and  false  theories  of  government  action  when 
so  important  a  matter  is  not  even  seriously  considered. 
For  one  series  of  years  we  have  droughts  which  ruin  the 
crops  in  the  Ohio  and  Mississippi  valleys.  Then  follows 
a  series  of  years  when  there  are  inundations  which  de- 
stroy valuable  lives  and  crops  that  are  worth  millions. 
These  alternate  seasons  of  drought  and  flood  are  known 
to  be  due  to  the  wasteful  cutting  down  of  the  timber  on 
the  banks  and  at  the  headwaters  of  the  streams  which  feed 
the  "  Father  of  Waters."  Reforesting  these  now  treeless 
regions  would  be  of  incalculable  benefit  to  the  whole 
country.  But  to  do  this  would  involve  national  action, 
and  that  our  Jeffersonian  theory  of  government  will  not 
permit. 

Nev. — But  surely  this  state  of  things  will  not  continue 
always.  The  contest  for  the  integrity  of  the  nation  was 
fought  in  defiance  of  all  our  theories  of  government,  and 
without  the  sanction  of  our  Constitution.  We  all  know 
the  result.  If  nothing  but  the  nation  can  cope  with  the 
defects  of  nature,  will  not  our  people  eventually  take  a 
common-sense  view  of  the  matter  ? 


AS    TO   IRRIGATION.  I  1 9 

Sir  O. — Not,  I  am  afraid,  until  we  have  suffered  very 
greatly  from  following  false  gods.  These  irrigating 
projects  you  speak  of  ought  to  be  undertaken  by  the  gen- 
eral government,  but  that  cannot  be  expected.  Private 
corporations  are  already  in  the  field  to  supply  the  de- 
mand for  water  in  arid  districts.  They  will  prove  im- 
mensely profitable,  and  for  the  next  forty  years  they  will 
yield  untold  wealth  to  a  new  crop  of  millionaires.  In  the 
past,  land  was  the  basis  of  wealth,  and  the  means  by 
which  great  fortunes  were  amassed.  In  all  ages  mer- 
chants and  traders  enrich  themselves  by  exacting  com- 
missions from  producers  and  consumers.  The  latter 
part  of  the  nineteenth  century  witnessed  the  growth  of  a 
new  class  of  very  rich  men,  made  so  by  corporate  profits, 
largely  those  of  railway  companies  ;  but  I  confidently 
predict  that  a  new  class  of  wealthy  men  will  soon  make 
their  appearance,  whose  great  fortunes  will  be  due  to  the 
fact  that  the  nation  will  permit  them  to  monopolize 
water  privileges  which  are  essential  to  farmers  in  the  far 
West.  The  latter  will  be  exploited  to  aggregate  wealth 
into  few  hands.  It  is  thus  that  private  enterprise  usually 
gets  the  start  of  the  general  public.  The  average  man  is 
always  rather  stupid,  and  in  this  case  our  political  tradi- 
tions favor  the  monopolist  at  the  expense  of  the  com- 
munity. 

Nev. — There  is  another  work  which  governments  ought 
to  undertake.  We  are  subject  to  a  plague  of  grasshop- 
pers, which  visits  the  West  every  seventeen  or  eighteen 
years.  They  were  very  destructive  in  1875,  and  are  due 
again  in  1889.  They  promise  to  ruin  the  cereal  crops  of 
the  Northwest.  There  is  only  one  way  to  get  rid  of 
them,  and  that  is  to  turn  over  the  soil  and  cultivate  the 
grounds  which  are  their  primary  breeding-places.     We 


120  GLIMPSES  OF  THE  FUTURE. 

who  live  in  the  grasshopper  country  can  point  out  the  lo- 
calities whence  this  destructive  pest  will  issue  in  count- 
less numbers.  Every  thousand  dollars  spent  in  turning 
over  the  soil  they  start  from  would  save  millions. 

Sir  O. — We  shall  have  to  suffer  another  year  of 
depredation  before  you  could  induce  an  American  Con- 
gress to  provide  against  this  evil.  I  judge  that  some 
time  in  the  not  distant  future  an  entire  change  of  senti- 
ment as  to  what  the  government  may  do  will  be  experi- 
enced by  the  American  people.  The  late  Stephen  Pearl 
Andrews  in  accounting  for  radicals  who  became  con- 
servative in  their  old  age,  and  conservatives  who  are  con- 
verted to  liberal  views, — such  as  William  E.  Gladstone, — 
invented  the  phrase  "  a  terminal  conversion  into  oppo- 
sites."  An  example  he  gave  was  that  of  a  caterpillar 
which  would  climb  a  stick,  and  when  he  could  get  no 
higher,  crawl  down  again  on  the  opposite  side.  England 
was  only  recently  the  very  apostle  of  free  trade — unre- 
stricted bargains  and  unlimited  competition  ;  yet  it  has 
been  forced  to  pass  laws  limiting  the  hours  of  labor — 
that  is,  interfering  in  free  bargaining  between  capitalists 
and  laborers.  The  Gladstone  land  laws  are  a  direct 
state  interference  with  free  contracts  between  landlords 
and  tenants.  England  has  nationalized  its  telegraphs, 
opened  government  savings-banks,  and  started  life  in- 
surance, all  of  which  is  in  open  defiance  of  the  canons  of 
English  political  economy.  So  I  judge  this  country  will 
in  time  come  to  see  the  wisdom  of  using  all  the  power  of 
the  people  for  the  benefit  of  the  people.  Then  will  the 
Federal  government  utilize  our  great  national  advan- 
tages. It  will  reforest  the  waste  places,  provide  reser- 
voirs to  hold  the  surplus  waters  of  its  rivers,  and  thus 
keep  a  supply  on  hand  for  seasons  of  drought.       There 


AS  TO  IRRIGATION.  12  i 

would  then  be  a  national  system  of  irrigation,  and  such 
plagues  as  that  of  the  locust  swarms  would  be  put  an  end 
to.  All  this  and  more  besides  ought  to  be  the  work  of 
the  twentieth  century.  Then  the  headwaters  of  all  our 
great  rivers  ought  to  be  reforested  under  the  auspices  or 
under  the  general  direction  of  the  Federal  government. 
As  in  Europe,  no  one  should  be  allowed  to  cut  down  a 
tree  without  planting  another  in  its  place.  Our  wasteful 
destruction  of  forests  is  almost  a  crime  against  the  gen- 
erations that  are  to  follow  us.  But  perhaps  I  am  indulg- 
ing in  a  Utopia. 


JOURNALISM   AS  IT  IS  AND  WILL  BE. 


Journalist. — What  is  to  be  the  future  of  the  book, 
the  magazine,  and  the  weekly  and  daily  periodical  press  ? 
There  must,  doubtless,  be  as  many  changes  in  the  future 
as  in  the  past,  and  certainly  the  world  of  literature  has 
changed  very  greatly  within  the  last  two  hundred  years. 

Sir  Oracle. — In  discussing  this  important  matter 
there  are  several  things  to  be  kept  in  mind.  The  num- 
ber of  readers  of  books  and  periodicals  is  steadily  and 
largely  increasing  the  world  over.  From  this  it  follows 
that  there  will  be  a  greater  variety  of  publications,  which 
will  appeal  to  widely  diversified  tastes.  Hence  there  will 
be  a  specialization  in  literature,  of  which  we  have  a  fore- 
taste in  the  press  of  to-day.  Time  was  when  our  periodi- 
cals were  like  a  cross-road  country  store.  They  aimed 
to  satisfy  all  the  news  wants  of  the  community,  as  the 
store  does  the  every-day  requirements  of  its  immediate 
neighborhood.  The  leading  city  journals  of  thirty  or 
fifty  years  ago,  in  addition  to  opinions  on  current  poli- 
tics, and  the  publication  of  the  news  of  the  world,  tried 
to  report  all  the  markets.  This  last  is  now  more  satis- 
factorily done  by  special  trade  papers. 

Journalist. — Your  reference  to  the  country  store  re- 
calls the  fact  that,  as  the  towns  grew,  there  was  a  speciali- 
zation, which  resulted  in  dry-goods,  boots  and  shoes, 
hats,  hardware,  and  groceries  being  sold  at  separate  es- 


JOURNALISM  AS  IT  IS  AND  WILL  BE.       1 23 

tablishments  ;  but  the  last  phase  of  retail  traffic  is  the 
re-appearance,  in  our  large  cities,  of  the  country  store 
enormously  magnified.  A  woman  shopper  can  go  to  the 
Bon  Marche,  in  Paris,  to  Whiteley's,  in  London,  to  Jor- 
dan, Marsh,  &:  Co.,  in  Boston,  Wanamaker's,  in  Phila- 
delphia, and  to  corresponding  establishments  in  all  the 
great  capitals  in  the  world,  and  buy  within  its  walls 
literally  every  thing  she  or  her  family  may  need.  Now 
is  it  not  likely  that  something  analogous  will  take  place 
in  the  newspaper  world  ?  Will  not  certain  great  journals 
endeavor  to  supply  the  public  appetite  for  news  as  well 
as  give  entertaining  reading  matter,  which  now  has  to  be 
gathered  from  many  sources  ? 

Sir  O. — I  believe  it  is  a  fact  that  there  are  fewer  daily 
journals  in  London  to-day  than  there  were  thirty  years 
ago.  There  is  a  tendency  to  monopoly  in  the  newspaper 
world  as  in  trade.  A  man  comes  to  the  front  in  a  news- 
paper, who  has  good  business  sense.  He  knows  instinc- 
tively what  readers  want,  and  hence  his  journal  gets  the 
largest  list  of  subscribers  and  the  most  advertising  patron- 
age. The  average  New  Yorker,  for  instance,  in  making 
out  his  list  of  newspapers,  will  have  at  his  breakfast- 
table  the  journal  which  he  thinks  is  the  soundest  in  its 
views  on  general  topics,  and  which  furnishes  him  with 
the  news  in  the  most  attractive  way.  On  leaving  his 
daily  business  he  will  pick  up  that  evening  paper  which 
gives  the  news  of  the  day  in  a  taking  manner.  Then  the 
same  head  of  the  family  has  his  trade  journal,  his  reli- 
gious and  literary  weekly,  and,  perhaps,  a  couple  of 
monthly  magazines.  This  is  about  as  much  reading  as 
the  average  business  man  cares  for.  But  on  Sunday  he 
has  more  time  to  read,  and  so  the  Sunday  editions  of  all 
our  papers  in  the  leading  cities   furnish   two    or   three 


124  GLIMPSES  OF  THE  FUTURE. 

times  more  matter — much  of  it  of  a  miscellaneous  char- 
acter— than  they  do  on  week-days. 

Journalist. — What  criticism  have  you  to  urge  against 
the  daily  press  as  at  present  organized  ? 

Sir  O. — That  is  a  large  question,  and  one  which  ought 
to  be  answered  exhaustively.  But  there  is  no  way  of 
getting  a  criticism  on  the  press  before  the  public.  News- 
paper editors  and  owners  do  not  propose  to  "  foul  their 
own  nests,"  and  as  they  control  the  organ  which  com- 
municates directly  with  the  public,  the  truth  about  the 
newspapers  is  rarely  told,  and  never  enforced. 

Journalist. — Suppose  you  outline  a  few  of  the  short- 
comings of  the  press. 

Sir  O. — To  begin  with,  they  are  business  enterprises  ; 
their  primary  object  is  to  live  and  make  money.  It 
would  seem  that  the  way  to  do  this  would  be  to  give  the 
news  fully,  and  to  pass  fair  judgments  upon  current 
events  in  the  editorial  columns  ;  and,  undoubtedly,  no 
paper  can  be  really  great  or  popular  unless  it  fulfils 
these  conditions.  But  readers  of  newspapers  have  preju- 
dices and  passions,  advertisers  have  to  be  kept  in  mind, 
and  then  the  real  owner  of  the  paper  has  business  or  po- 
litical aspirations.  These  considerations  influence  edi- 
torial writers,  and  it  is  instinctively  felt  that  unreason- 
able and  widespread  prejudices  must  be  catered  to,  and 
popular  passions  inflamed  rather  than  calmed.  There 
was  no  newspaper,  for  instance,  to  object  to  the  atrocious 
hanging  of  Mrs.  Surrat,  and  they  all  hounded  on  the 
authorities  at  Chicago  to  execute  the  Anarchists — a  pro- 
ceeding which,  I  think,  the  common-sense  of  the  future 
will  pronounce  unwise.  On  one  of  the  burning  questions 
of  the  day,  that  of  labor,  the  press  is  unanimously  ranged 
on  the  side  of  capital.     It  does  not  give  the  dumb  toil- 


JOURNALISM  AS  IT  IS  AND  WILL  BE.       \2% 

ing  millions  any  sort  of  a  show.  The  reason  for  this  is 
obvious.  Newspapers  represent  invested  capital.  The 
owner  of  the  most  unimportant  daily  or  weekly  paper  is 
an  employer  of  labor,  and  instinctively  takes  ground 
against  the  workingmen.  This  is  as  true  of  the  press  of 
England,  France,  and  the  Continent,  as  of  America. 
The  only  friends  of  the  laboring  classes  are  the  philoso- 
phers and  some  college  professors.  Auguste  Comte  and 
John  S.  Mill  befriended  the  laborer,  and  sundry  writers 
in  some  of  our  American  colleges  also  give  the  claims  of 
the  working  people  a  really  fair  consideration. 

Journalist. — You  have  not  mentioned  one  short- 
coming of  the  press,  its  preference  for  sensational  news 
rather  than  for  the  discussion  of  topics  which  would 
improve  and  refine  the  general  readers. 

Sir  O. — That  is  a  defect  which  in  my  opinion  cannot 
very  well  be  cured.  All  history  deals  with  exceptional 
or,  if  you  please  so  to  call  it,  sensational  incidents:  that  is, 
wars,  scandals,  catastrophes  of  some  kind  or  another.  It 
is  sickening  to  take  up  a  newspaper  and  read  of  murders, 
or  of  railroad  and  marine  disasters,  the  abandonment  of 
wives  by  their  husbands,  and  vice-versa.  Now  the  recital 
of  these  exceptional  occurrences  gives  a  false  idea  of  the 
social  life  of  the  last  part  of  the  nineteenth  century. 
But  it  must  be  confessed  that  the  readers'  taste  craves 
this  kind  of  literary  pabulum,  yet  it  certainly  gives  dis- 
torted views  of  human  life. 

Journalist. — But  is  there  not  a  new  departure  in  the 
writing  of  history,  which  tells  of  the  growth  and  social 
life  of  the  people,  and  which  does  not  dwell  on  battles 
or  the  scandals  of  court  life.  Green's  "  Short  History  of 
the  English  People,"  and  McMaster's  annals  of  our  own 
country  are  cases  in  point.     Why  not  a  newspaper  with 


126  GLIMPSES  OF  THE  FUTURE. 

the  same  object  in  view,  if  that  is  to  give  contemporary 
history  in  an  intelligent  way.  We  live  in  a  wonderful 
world  and  in  a  marvellous  age  ;  surely  photographs  of 
the  really  important  events  of  our  time  would  have  an 
audience  fit,  even  if  few. 

Sir  O. — There  is  a  great  deal  of  our  periodical  litera- 
ture which  even  now  fills  that  field.  Take  the  monthly 
magazines  of  this  country  and  England,  some  of  the 
weeklies,  and  occasional  articles  in  the  dailies  ;  they  all 
print  very  good  matter.  With  wise  management,  I  think  a 
newspaper  dealing  with  such  subjects  would  have  as 
much  success  in  journalism  as  Green's  English  history 
had  among  historical  works. 

Journalist. — But  come  to  the  point.  What  are  the 
tendencies  of  journalism  ?  How  will  the  newspaper 
of  the  twentieth  century  differ  from  that  of  the  nine- 
teenth ? 

Sir  O. — There  are  several  factors  which  may  come 
into  play,  the  influence  of  which  it  is  very  difficult  to  de- 
termine. It  looks  to  me  as  if  the  journal  of  the  future 
will  dispense  with  the  compositor  or  typesetter.  The 
artist  will  be  employed  as  well  as  the  writer ;  and  their 
sketches  and  text  will  be  photographs  put  on  gelatine, 
or  some  similar  menstruum,  and  multiplied  ad  infinitum. 
This  would  revolutionize  the  whole  art  of  printing,  and 
would  appeal  to  the  artistic  taste  of  the  community.  Our 
newspapers  to-day  are  hideous  libels  upon  typographical 
art  ;  they  are  an  offence  to  the  eye  and  good  taste  gen- 
erally. I  try  not  to  indulge  in  Utopias  ;  yet  I  cannot  but 
believe  that  the  average  Sunday  paper  of  the  year  1888 
will  be  looked  upon  twenty-five  years  from  now  as  some- 
thing monstrous, — inconceivable.  Then  who  knows  but 
what  the  graphophone  may  take  the  place  of  much  of  our 


JOURNALISM  AS  IT  IS  AND  WILL  BE.        \2J 

permanent  and  transient  literature.  There  is  a  conceit 
in  Bellamy's  "  Looking  Backward,"  which  may  become  a 
reality.  In  the  year  2000,  he  says,  it  will  not  be  neces- 
sary to  go  to  a  meeting  to  hear  a  political  orator,  or  to  a 
church  to  be  edified  by  a  fine  discourse,  or  to  a  concert 
hall  to  hear  the  noblest  instrumental  or  vocal  music.  The 
telephone  and  the  graphophone  will  be  so  perfected  that 
we  can  enjoy  these  pleasures  at  our  own  homes.  Now  there 
may  be  something  in  this.  Who  knows  but  what  news- 
paper judgments  may  be  set  aside  by  the  ability  of 
every  citizen  to  get  into  direct  communication  with  origi- 
nal sources  of  information.  Suppose,  for  instance,  the 
Chicago  Anarchists,  before  they  died,  could  have  told 
their  side  of  the  story  to  the  public  directly  through  the 
telephone,  might  it  not  have  made  some  difference  in 
public  judgment  ?  Grand-Master  Powderly,  Brother- 
hood of  Engineers'  Arthur,  Henry  George,  or  Father 
McGlynn,  at  present  have  no  show  with  the  public, 
because  newspaper  proprietors  are  violently  prejudiced 
against  them,  and  will  not  give  their  side  of  the  story  : 
but  suppose  there  was  some  means  for  a  curious  and  im- 
partial public  to  get  these  men's  own  statements. 

Journalist. — This  is  all  hypothetical.  Tell  us 
briefly  what  you  expect  within  the  next  twenty-five  years 
in  the  way  of  changes  in  our  periodical  press. 

Sir  O. — I  believe  that  illustrated  papers  daily  and 
weekly  will  abound.  Daily  papers  will  decrease  in  num- 
bers, but  improve  in  tone.  But  in  the  weekly  and 
monthly  publications  all  tastes  and  interests  will  be  ap- 
pealed to.  I  presume  that  the  sensational  paper  then  as 
now  would  have  the  largest  circulation  ;  but  the  moder- 
ate and  sensible,  the  widest  influence.  The  moral  tone 
of  the  journals  of  that  day  will  correspond  to  the  educa* 


128  GLIMPSES  OF  THE  FUTURE. 

tion  and  refinement  of  the  mass  of  daily  readers.  I  hope 
for  the  best ;  but  I  see  nothing  to  warrant  me  in  believ- 
ing that  the  American  of  the  twentieth  century  will  differ 
very  greatly  from  the  American  of  the  nineteenth  cen- 
tury. Wealth  and  luxury  is  increasing,  and  will  be 
accompanied  by  a  certain  amount  of  demoralization. 

Journalist. — In  view  of  the  enormous  mass  of  books 
and  periodicals  published  will  not  some  machinery  be 
adopted  to  instruct  people  in  what  to  read  ? 

Sir  O. — There  are  agencies  of  that  kind  at  work  now. 
Every  college  instructs  its  graduates  as  to  what  is  the 
best  literature.  Here  is  a  process  of  natural  selection 
going  on  which  is  burying  bad  and  weak  books  out  of 
sight.  All  journalistic  work  is  necessarily  ephemeral. 
The  most  brilliant  writer  of  current  topics  lives  but  for  a 
day. 

Journalist. — Let  me  close  this  conversation  with  a 
prediction.  The  Jew  will,  I  think,  cut  in  the  future  a 
larger  figure  in  American  journalism  than  he  has  in  the 
past.  The  bulk  of  the  Continental  press  is  openly  or  se- 
cretly under  the  control  of  Jews.  The  most  widely  cir- 
culated journal  .in  London,  the  Telegraph,  is  owned  by  a 
member  of  that  race  ;  and  the  same  is  true  of  the  most 
popular  paper  in  New  York  City.  But  Mr.  Joseph  Pu- 
litzer is,  I  believe,  the  only  Hebrew  owning  an  American 
newspaper  just  now.  The  Jew  knows  how  to  cater  to  the 
minor  wants  of  mankind.  He  is  the  most  expert  of  ped- 
dlers, and  the  most  successful  of  merchants.  His  abili- 
ties and  his  moral  defects  are  just  what  are  most  likely  to 
find  their  full  play  in  American  journalism. 


A  BODY  OF  CENSORS  PROPOSED. 


Theorist. — Is  it  not  a  defect  in  our  institutions  that 
there  is  no  organ  for  calling  the  attention  of.  our  people 
to  their  own  deficiencies  ?  The  politicians  flatter  the 
people,  the  business  of  the  Fourth  of  July  orators  is  to 
set  forth  the  glory  and  strength  of  the  country  and  the 
superiority  of  our  institutions  over  those  of  other  nations. 
The  press  ought  to  hold  the  mirror  up  to  nature  and  be 
the  censor  of  public  morals.  But  newspapers  are  busi- 
ness enterprises,  and  the  aim  of  editor  and  publisher  is 
to  cater  to  popular  passions  and  prejudices  and  not  cor- 
rect public  evils. 

Sir  Oracle. — I  have  long  believed  that  we  ought  to 
have  had  in  this  country  a  body  of  men  and  women  known 
as  censors.  They  should  devote  themselves  to  the  un- 
popular task  of  showing  up  whatever  evil  influences  there 
were  in  our  institutions  with  a  vieAv  to  their  correction. 
They  should  have  their  representatives  in  every  legisla- 
tive body — local,  State,  and  national.  But  their  business 
would  be  to  report  and  recommend  what  action  should 
be  taken  by  the  body  of  the  voters.  They  themselves 
should  give  up  all  hope  of  holding  places  of  power  or 
profit. 

Theorist. — There  are  traces  of  some  such  institutions 
in  many  countries.  The  prophets  under  the  Jewish  regime 
were  critics,  and  very  stern  ones,  of  the  shortcomings, 

129 


130  GLIMPSES  OF  THE  FUTURE. 

both  of  princes  and  the  people.  There  are  public  censors 
in  China  to-day,  but  they  often  degenerate  into  mere 
spies,  as  their  reports  are  made,  not  to  the  public,  but  to 
the  ruling  powers.  One  of  the  vaguest  chapters  in  Roman 
history  is  that  which  relates  to  the  censors,  who,  during 
one  period  of  the  republic,  were  very  powerful.  In 
periods  of  corruption  they  were  authorized  to  revise  the 
polling  list,  and  they  often  disfranchised  large  masses  of 
voters.  They  could  declare  that  certain  candidates  were 
unworthy  of  holding  high  office.  The  censors  themselves 
sometimes  became  rulers  in  Rome.  The  Appian  Way 
was  built  by  and  named  after  a  famous  censor.  But  the 
rise  and  fall  of  that  useful  institution  is  shrouded  in 
mystery. 

Sir  O. — It  would  be  a  great  benefit  to  our  country  if 
there  was  an  organization  of  voluntary  censors  in  every 
large  city.  The  press  claims  to  represent  public  opinion 
on  all  the  great  questions  of  the  day,  and  to  be  on  the 
side  of  right  as  against  wrong.  But  the  business  inter- 
ests of  the  journals  often  array  them  on  the  side  of  cor- 
ruption and  popular  prejudice.  Take  the  monstrous 
abuses  of  our  pension  systems.  The  politicians  dare 
not  call  their  souls  their  own  in  face  of  the  soldier 
vote.  The  press  declines  to  represent  the  public  con- 
science in  this  matter,  and  has  no  word  of  rebuke 
for  the  $80,000,000  spent  in  pensions  annually  more 
than  a  quarter  of  a  century  after  the  civil  war  closed. 
The  newspaper  editors  know  of  course  that  fully  $60,000,- 
000  of  this  vast  sum  is  a  pure  steal.  But  while  they  will 
yelp  like  curs  at  a  few  thousands  in  a  doubtful  appropri- 
ation for  an  indispensable  river  and  harbor  bill,  they  say 
nothing  about  the  hideous  waste  of  these  pension  bills. 

Theorist. — A  body  of  voluntary  censors,  such  as  you 


A    BODY  OF  CENSORS  PROPOSED.  131 

propose,  would  be  very  unpopular, — that  is,  if  they  did 
their  duty  and  told  the  truth  about  public  men  and  public 
measures.  Then  what  guaranty  would  there  be  that 
they  would  be  always  right  in  their  criticisms  and 
strictures  ? 

Sir  O. — Of  course  they  would  be  wrong  at  times  ; 
but  if  they  entered  upon  their  work  with  a  pledge  that 
they  would  never  hold  office  of  profit  personally,  they 
would  give  a  guaranty  of  disinterested  conduct.  They 
themselves  would  be  so  sharply  criticised  by  the  power- 
ful interests  they  would  assail,  that  they  would  be  forced 
to  be  prudent  and  lean  on  the  side  of  justice. 

Theorist.— But  would  it  be  feasible  to  organize  such  a 
body  ?  Are  there  men  and  women  in  every  community 
willing  to  sacrifice  themselves  for  the  good  of  the  state  ? 

Sir  O. — Every  free  state  that  has  appeared  in  history 
has  developed  men  and  women  willing  to  sacrifice  their 
own  ease,  and  even  life,  for  the  public  good.  Men  who 
died  on  the  battle-field  were  often  inspired  by  pure  love 
of  country.  The  case  of  the  Abolitionists  and  other  re- 
formers shows  that  certain  people  are  always  ready  to 
become  martyrs  so  that  humanity  may  be  served.  I  think 
if  it  was  clearly  shown  that  a  body  of  censors,  such  as  I 
have  designated,  would  be  useful  to  the  public,  there 
would  not  be  wanting  plenty  of  volunteers  to  help  cor- 
rect the  great  public  evils. 

Theorist. — What  national  obliquities  and  shortcomings 
have  you  particularly  in  mind  which  need  correction  and 
abatement  ? 

Sir  O. — To  begin  with,  we  are  a  vainglorious  people, 
and  to  correct  this  defect,  we  need  frequent  re- 
minders of  our  shortcomings.  Take  our  system  of  popu- 
lar education,  for  instance  ;  we  are  far  in   the  rear  of 


132  GLIMPSES   OF  THE  FUTURE. 

Germany  or  Switzerland,  and  in  the  present  rate  of  retro- 
gression Great  Britain  and  France  will  be  ahead  of  us  in 
time.  Yet  it  is  not  many  years  since  our  public-school 
system  was  the  best  in  the  world.  Then  our  legal  ma- 
chinery is  in  a  deplorable  condition  ;  we  have  more  law 
and  probably  less  justice  than  any  other  modern  civilized 
nation.  Our  political  methods  are  exceedingly  defective. 
We  elect  a  Congress  in  one  year  which  does  not  com- 
mence to  legislate  for  a  year  and  a  half  afterwards,  and 
this  in  an  age  of  steam  and  electricity.  An  English  Par- 
liament assembles  immediately  after  a  general  election, 
and  hence  responds  to  the  public  opinion  of  its  day. 
Then  the  frequent  Parliamentary  elections  in  England 
serve  to  inform  the  Cabinet  as  to  the  drift  of  opinion  in 
the  political  constituencies.  The  permanently  hostile 
attitude  of  our  press  towards  the  laboring  classes  is  a 
very  serious  matter,  and  may  sometime  result  in  a  catas- 
trophe. Then  the  censors  could  canvass  our  list  of  can- 
didates at  every  election,  and  warn  voters  against  the 
black  sheep.  It  is  now  impossible  for  us  to  tell  the  un- 
worthy from  the  worthy  we  vote  for  on  the  several  tick- 
ets. But  it  would  take  a  book  to  cover  this  ground.  It 
is  very  certain  that  the  press  does  not  fulfil  its  mission, 
except  in  a  very  inadequate  way,  as  a  censor  of  public 
morals  or  a  corrector  of  popular  delusions.  If  a  new 
Christ  was  to  be  sacrificed,  so  eager  is  the  press  to  rep- 
resent the  passions  of  the  hour,  that  it  would  be  unani- 
mous in  demanding  his  crucifixion.  I  confidently  pre- 
dict that  somehow  or  other  there  will  arise  a  body  of  men 
and  women  who  will  do  for  us  what  the  censors  did  for 
Rome,  and  the  prophets  for  the  people  of  Israel. 


THE  FATE  OF  THE  NEGRO. 


Mr.  Newlight. — I  recently  read  Froude's  "West 
Indies,"  Sir  Oracle,  and  it  struck  me  that  there  are  some 
lessons  to  be  drawn  from  it  which  you  might  set  forth  in 
these  conversations. 

Sir  Oracle. — I  am  willing  to  consider  any  subject, 
but  must  decline  to  commit  myself  to  any  views  which 
are  suggested  to  your  mind.  Suppose  you  go  ahead  and 
take  the  lead  in  the  conversation. 

Mr.  N. — Very  good.  I  propose  to  give  utterance  to 
opinions  which  may  be  new  to  your  readers,  but  which  I 
think  are  justified  by  the  past  history  of  mankind.  I  am 
one  of  those  who  never  have  believed  in  the  equality  of 
mankind,  or  in  the  general  theory  of  human  rights  which 
underlies  the  Declaration  of  Independence.  I  am  of  the 
opinion  that  the  doctrine  of  evolution  throws  a  light 
upon  this  question  of  human  progress  which  discredits 
not  only  the  theological  but  the  rationalistic  theories 
which  have  been  held  heretofore. 

Sir  O. — I  am  afraid  this  is  too  large  a  subject  to  be 
considered  in  a  conversation.  You  can  only  take  it  up 
in  sections.  Suppose  we  consider  only  the  future  of  the 
negro  race.  Indeed,  as  I  remember,  that  is  the  topic 
emphasized  by  Froude's  visit  to  the  West  India  Islands. 

Mr.  N. — In  considering  that  phase  of  the  question  we 
must  subordinate  the  whole  discussion  to  some  general 

i33 


134  GLIMPSES  OF  THE  FUTURE. 

theory.  Now  the  doctrine  of  human  rights  applied  to 
the  whole  human  family  does  not  work.  Free  institu- 
tions are  only  fitted  for  the  Caucasian  race,  and  have  not 
as  yet  proved  workable,  except  among  the  English- 
speaking  races. 

Sir  O. — Yes  ;  I  think  I  see  the  drift  of  your  thought. 
Liberty  will  do  for  Englishmen  and  Americans.  The 
negro  to-day  is  the  same  as  he  was  at  the  time  of  Sesos- 
tris.  He  makes  no  progress  except  under  the  tutelage  of 
the  white.  Left  to  himself  he  sinks  back  into  barbarism, 
as  witness  Hayti. 

Mr.  N. — Yes  ;  that  is  my  line  of  argument.  Froude 
shows  that  the  West  Indies  are  becoming  barbarized  ; 
that  any  change  which  permits  the  blacks  to  dominate 
over  the  whites  will  end  in  the  destruction  of  all  civiliza- 
tion. In  their  native  country  the  blacks  organize  witch 
hunts  and  deliberately  kill  the  more  intelligent  members 
of  the  tribe  ;  hence  there  is  a  premium  on  mediocrity  and 
savagery. 

Sir  O. — These  discussions  are  interesting  in  view  of 
the  fact  that  the  Dark  Continent  is  about  being  opened 
up.  The  next  fifty  years  will  see  a  mighty  change  in 
that  ancient  and  most  backward  section  of  the  earth. 
Gold  is  being  discovered  in  many  parts  of  the  continent. 
Railroads  are  being  pushed  toward  the  Congo  region, 
and  in  a  very  few  years  the  white  man  will  dominate  in 
regions  now  controlled  by  colored  potentates.  It  is  a 
pity  some  well-defined  plan  is  not  agreed  upon  by  the 
leading  nations  to  govern  their  future  relations  with  the 
colored  faces  of  Africa. 

Mr.  N. — So  far,  of  course,  we  have  been  poisoning 
these  poor  colored  people  with  whiskey  and  scattering 
foul  diseases  throughout  the  continent.     This  will  thin 


THE  FATE   OF  THE  NEGRO.  1 35 

off  their  numbers.  Christianity  makes  no  real  progress 
in  Africa.  According  to  Canon  Taylor  and  the  Rev.  Mr. 
Johnstone  of  the  Church  of  England,  the  one  reforming 
religious  influence  in  Africa  is  the  spread  of  Islamism. 
Mohammedanism  seems  to  be  better  adapted  to  the  calibre 
of  the  negro  brain  than  Christianity.  Then  it  is  more 
moralizing,  for  every  Moslem  church  is  a  total-abstinence 
society  ;  while  rum  and  Christianity  accompany  each 
other  wherever  traders  and  missionaries  can  get  a  foot- 
hold among  uncivilized  races.  Of  course,  this  is  repug- 
nant to  the  great  body  of  Christian  people,  but  their 
governments,  nevertheless,  play  into  the  hands  of  the 
conscienceless  traders. 

Sir  O. — These  same  writers  you  mention,  while  they 
doubt  the  possibility  of  progress  by  the  pure  negro,  say 
there  are  two  crosses  which  produce  fairly  good  results. 
One  gives  us  the  Zulus  of  South  Africa  ;  the  other  is  the 
cross  between  the  Arab  and  the  African,  which  produces 
a  warlike  and  rather  a  superior  race. 

Mr.  N. — All  these  questions  ought  to  be  submitted  to 
a  congress  of  experts — to  scientific  men,  in  other  words, — 
and  they  should  give  the  result  of  their  conferences  for 
the  guidance  of  the  leading  nations.  It  is  a  scandal  to 
our  civilization  and  Christianity  that  we  should  insist 
upon  forcing  opium  and  strong  drink  upon  the  semi- 
civilized  nations  as  well  as  the  savages.  Then  there 
ought  to  be  some  agreement  for  organizing  a  system  that 
will  compel  the  savages  of  Africa  to  do  some  regular 
work.  They  are  now  idle  and  of  their  own  accord  will 
never  be  induced  to  labor  continuously.  Africa  will 
never  be  redeemed,  except  in  two  ways  :  either  the 
natives  must  be  forced  to  work,  or  they  must  be  killed  off 
to  give  place  for  the  races  who  will  work.     This  exter- 


136  GLIMPSES  OF  THE   FUTURE. 

minating  process,  by  the  way,  is  the  one  in  vogue  among 
the  English-speaking  races,  as  witness  the  Red  Indians 
of  this  continent,  the  Australian  and  Maori,  as  well  as 
the  aborigines  of  South  Africa. 

Sir  O. — Do  you  know  what  you  are  saying  ?  You  are 
advocating  the  reestablishment  of  slavery.  Would  that 
not  be  a  step  backward  in  the  civilization  of  the  age  ? 

Mr.  N. — I  am  advocating  going  forward  instead  of 
backward.  Slavery  in  the  past  was  a  vast  benefit  to  man- 
kind. It  was  the  gate  through  which  the  foremost  races 
passed  in  order  to  reach  higher  levels  of  civilization.  In 
slavery  human  beings  learned  how  to  work  continuously 
for  the  benefit  of  others.  Incidental  to  slavery  were 
many  and  grievous  evils,  but  some  day  civilization  will 
again  protect  weak  people  from  themselves  by  forcing 
them  to  work,  so  that  their  labor  may  be  utilized  for  their 
own  benefit  as  well  as  for  the  community.  We  shall 
probably  never  again  see  personal  slavery — that  is,  no 
one  person  will  ever  be  the  bondman  or  bondwoman 
of  any  person  or  family.  But  I  judge  that  the  time  is 
coming  when  those  that  cannot  take  care  of  themselves, 
who  are  in  constant  danger  of  starvation,  who  are  irre- 
deemable drunkards  or  opium-eaters,  will  be  forced  to 
accept  the  mastership  of  officers  appointed  by  the  com- 
munity. They  will  be  made  to  work,  but  will  be  insured 
not  only  against  starvation,  but  suffering  of  any  kind.  It 
is  a  shame  to  the  community  that  so  many  millions  are 
always  on  the  verge  of  starvation.  The  condition  of"  the 
poor,  even  in  most  civilized  nations,  is  a  crime  against 
humanity. 

Sir  O. — Those  problems  will  come  up  for  settlement  in 
the  Old  World  before  they  will  disturb  us  here.  I  do 
not  see  how  we  can  set  to  work  to  reestablish  a  modified 


THE  FATE   OF  THE  NEGRO.  1 37 

system  of  slavery,  in  view  of  the  traditions  of  our  history. 
But  I  agree  with  you  that  the  future  of  the  negro  race  in 
the  West  India  Islands  is  likely  to  lead  to  serious  com- 
plications in  the  future.  Naturally  Cuba,  Jamaica,  and 
Hayti  ought,  in  the  fulness  of  time,  to  belong  to  the 
United  States.  But  our  people  will  not  be  willing  to 
hand  them  over  to  the  tender  mercies  of  the  degraded 
colored  people  in  those  islands.  Universal  suffrage  is  a 
farce  when  exercised  by  savages.  Then  we  will  not  be 
willing  to  see  England  apply  any  system  of  coerced  labor 
in  its  Western  possessions.  Now  every  thing  is  going 
to  the  dogs  in  those  beautiful  and  fertile  islands  because 
of  the  progressive  degradation  of  the  free  negroes.  The 
recent  news  from  Cuba  is  really  appalling.  The  blacks 
have  been  emancipated,  and  they  will  do  no  more  work. 
All  the  great  estates  on  the  island  are  going  to  waste. 
Taxation  is  increasing,  and  that  most  fertile  of  countries 
is  no  longer  producing  much  of  any  thing  for  export, 
while  the  blacks  are  relapsing  into  barbarism.  So  far  as 
industry  and  civilization  are  concerned,  the  emancipation 
of  the  slaves  in  the  West  India  Islands  has  proved  disas- 
trous in  every  way. 

Mr.  N. — I  have  small  hopes  of  gaining  any  converts 
to  my  apparently  retrograde  views,  but  I  rely  upon  the 
spread  of  scientific  knowledge  which  will  discredit  the 
human-right  theories  first  propounded  by  the  eighteenth- 
century  philosophers.  Men  are  not  born  free  ;  we  live 
in  a  hard  world,  and  the  conditions  throughout  life  are 
onerous.  We  must  do  the  best  we  can  ;  the  object,  of 
course,  being  the  greatest  good  to  the  greatest  number. 
This  may  involve  exceptional  hardships  to  a  few.  In  a 
beehive,  you  know,  the  superfluous  males  are  deliberately 
stung  to  death.     The  supreme  object  of  regard  is  the 


138  GLIMPSES   OF  THE  FUTURE. 

hive  ;  it  must  be  the  first  consideration,  even  as  against 
the  life  of  any  of  its  members.  So  it  will  eventually  be 
in  human  society.  Every  member  of  the  great  human 
hive  must  be  subordinated  to  the  community.  This  is 
true  ground  to  take  as  against  the  Anarchists.  For  the 
sake  of  the  individual  they  would  destroy  the  hive,  but 
the  contrary  doctrine  is  the  true  one.  We  are  all  cells 
in  the  great  body  of  humanity,  and  we  cannot  all  be  equal 
or  free  ;  we  must  get  our  consolation  in  the  knowledge 
that  we  are  working  for  the  great  whole. 


THE  TENDENCIES  OF  EDUCATION. 


Educator. — Might  it  not  be  a  good  idea  to  try  and 
indicate  the  changes  likely  to  occur  in  the  education  of 
the  generation  that  is  to  follow  us  ?  Do  you  not  think, 
Sir  Oracle,  that  we  shall  eventually  have  universities 
which  will  give  as  good  an  education  as  can  be  secured 
in  the  best  institutions  of  the  Old  World  ? 

Sir  Oracle. — The  question  of  education  is  a  vast  one 
and  involves  many  ramifications.  A  very  hopeful  sign  of 
the  times  is  the  willingness  of  our  rich  men  to  give  of 
their  abundance  to  promoting  what  they  deem  the  high- 
est forms  of  education.  In  the  Middle  Ages  the  wealthy 
gave  of  their  abundance  to  the  Church,  so  that  the  latter 
should  have  ample  funds  to  advance  the  interest  of  Cath- 
olicism and  incidentally  to  reform  and  educate  the  rulers 
of  the  people.  This  accounts  for  the  Catholic  Church 
owning  such  enormous  landed  possessions,  of  which  it 
has  since  been  stripped  by  nearly  every  modern  nation, 
including  the  Catholic  powers.  But  the  modern  rich  man 
bestows  his  benefactions  upon  educational  and  chari- 
table institutions.  Yes,  I  think  it  is  extremely  probable 
that  as  good  an  education  of  a  higher  sort  can  be  got  in 
this  country  as  abroad,  but  there  are  some  drawbacks. 

Ed. — To  what  do  you  refer  ? 

Sir  O. — Frankly  I  think  the  clerical  influence  is  alto- 
gether too  powerful  in  our  colleges  and  universities.  Ex- 


140  GLIMPSES   OF  THE  FUTURE. 

President  White  is  quite  correct  in  objecting  to  so  many 
of  our  colleges  furnishing  sinecures  to  broken-down 
clergymen.  Parents  naturally  want  their  sons  and  daugh- 
ters to  be  under  religious  influence,  and  hence  they  tole- 
rate the  great  number  of  "  reverends  "  who  are  made 
presidents  and  professors,  and  have  nothing  to  recom- 
mend them  but  their  clerical  profession.  They  are  gen- 
erally bad  business  men,  and  their  attitude  toward 
modern  science  is  antagonistic.  Curiously  enough  the 
institutions  in  the  Old  World  are  far  more  free  from 
mediaeval  religious  mysticism  than  are  those  of  our  own 
country.  What  is  known  as  advanced  scientific  thought 
has  very  little  show  in  any  of  our  colleges,  even  in  Har- 
vard. The  professional  chairs  represent  the  creeds  of  the 
past,  not  the  living  and  advanced  thought  of  the  present. 
It  may  not  be  generally  known,  but  at  Harvard  the  phil- 
osophy taught  the  pupils  by  the  most  popular  professors 
is  Hegelianism,  which  has  been  discredited  in  the  coun- 
try of  its  birth  for  the  past  fifty  years.  The  political 
economy  inculcated  in  the  same  institution  is  that  of  the 
Manchester  school,  which  is  thirty  years  behind  the  age. 
Yale,  Princeton,  and  Columbia  are  no  better  than  Har- 
vard. 

Ed. — Surely  there  are  some  institutions  which  give 
modern  thought  more  consideration. 

Sir  O. — Yes,  the  Johns  Hopkins  University  is  doing 
excellent  work.  It  is  turning  out  hosts  of  graduate  stu- 
dents who  are  fully  abreast  of  the  times,  especially  in 
sociology  and  political  economy.  Cornell  and  the  Uni- 
versity of  Michigan  "are  also  doing  good  work. 

Ed. — Is  there  no  way  of  enlightening  the  public  as  to 
the  merits  or  demerits  of  our  leading  institutions  ? 

Sir  O.— There  is  no  authoritative  criticism  of  our  vari- 


THE  TENDENCIES  OF  EDUCATION.  14I 

ous  collegiate  institutions.  England  has  had  the  benefit 
of  exhaustive  inquiries  into  educational  methods.  Parlia- 
mentary commissions  have  thoroughly  investigated  not 
only  the  leading  universities  but  the  various  public 
schools,  as  they  are  called,  such  as  Eton,  Harrow,  Rugby, 
and  Westminster.  Then  men  of  splendid  educational 
training,  such  as  Matthew  Arnold,  have  been  employed 
at  large  salaries  by  the  government  to  inquire  into  the 
educational  systems  of  France  and  Germany.  We  have 
no  such  machinery  for  forming  a  judgment  of  our  col- 
leges, and  parents  are  without  guides,  except  the  reputa- 
tion of  colleges  founded  upon  the  distinguished  graduates 
they  turned  out  thirty  or  forty  years  ago. 

Ed. — What  have  you  to  say  about  female  higher 
education  ? 

Sir  O. — I  suppose  that  the  graduates  of  our  female 
colleges  will  compare  favorably  with  any  other  class  of 
women  in  the  community.  They  will  have  more  general 
information,  better  health,  and  will  turn  out  good  wives 
and  mothers.  But  I  do  not  think  that  we  have  got  the 
best  results  from  such  institutions  as  Vassar,  Smith, 
Wellesley,  and  Cornell.  Vassar  has  been  nearly  a  quarter 
of  a  century  in  existence,  and,  as  far  as  I  know,  has  not 
produced  one  distinguished  woman.  Where  is  a  gradu- 
ate of  Vassar  known  as  being  eminent  in  art,  science  or 
literature  ?  But  I  have  no  doubt  that  that  institution  has 
produced  a  great  many  well-bred,  moral  young  women. 
Many  of  them  have  become  teachers,  and  good  ones  ;  but 
if  the  girls  originally  had  genius,  their  wings  have  been 
clipped  by  the  course  of  study.  It  will  be  remembered 
that  the  officers  of  Vassar  have  generally  been  Baptist 
clergymen  of  no  great  note  among  their  own  denomina- 
tion.    Wellesley  may  do  better  work,  but  the  officers  are 


I42  GLIMPSES  OF  THE  FUTURE. 

mostly  women.  I  look  for  best  work  in  colleges  where 
the  two  sexes  are  trained  together. 

Ed. — What  salient  feature  strikes  you  in  connection 
with  our  American  education? 

Sir  O. — The  fact  that  thirty  years  ago  we  were  ahead 
of  the  world  in  our  common-school  system,  whereas  now 
we  are  far  behind  other  civilized  countries.  The  statistics 
of  illiteracy  shows  that  there  are  over  sixteen  per  cent,  of 
the  American  people  who  cannot  read  or  write.  The 
proportion  of  illiterates  in  Germany  is  less  than  two  per 
cent.  Then  technical  education  is  far  in  the  rear  in  this 
country  compared  with  the  Continental  nations.  The 
most  artistic  designers  and  skilful  artisans  in  our  shops 
and  factories  are  generally  Germans.  The  American 
mechanics  are  forced  to  work  under  the  direction  of 
these  foreigners,  because  we  have  not  provided  them  with 
a  suitable  education.  Unfortunately  our  people  are 
monstrously  conceited  and  cannot  be  made  to  under- 
stand that  they  are  being  beaten  in  the  race  for  artistic 
and  industrial  supremacy. 

Ed. — What  suggestions  would  you  make  looking 
towards  a  reform  in  our  educational  method  ? 

Sir  O. — That  is  rather  a  large  question  to  answer  off- 
hand, for  it  would  require  a  volume  to  go  over  the  ground 
thoroughly.  Perhaps,  however,  I  may  venture  to  suggest 
a  few  points  :  (i)  Greater  attention  to  technical  educa- 
tion ;  every  boy  and  girl  in  our  public  schools  should  be 
trained  so  that  they  could  earn  their  living  by  some 
handicraft.  (2)  The  passage  of  the  Blair  or  some  simi- 
lar bill,  so  that  the  general  government  would  make  good 
any  deficiencies  in  the  State  educational  systems.  (3) 
The  appointment  of  commissions  to  investigate  every 
leading  educational  institution  in  the  country  and  report 


THE  TENDENCIES  OF  EDUCATION.  1 43 

to  the  public.  (4)  Putting  a  stop  to  the  abuse  of  quar- 
tering broken-down  clergymen  upon  colleges  to  furnish 
them  a  living.  (5)  The  establishment  of  a  great  national 
university  on  the  programme  put  forth  by  ex-President 
White,  of  Cornell.  (6)  Some  means  of  letting  rich  men 
know  in  what  way  their  benefactions  would  be  of  most 
value  in  advancing  the  cause  of  higher  education,  both 
of  men  and  women.  And,  finally,  I  would  have  incor- 
porated in  every  State  Constitution  a  provision  ordering 
every  Legislature  to  give  the  best  possible  education  to 
every  boy  and  girl  born  in  the  State.  Education  should 
be  something  more  than  learning  the  three  R'?..  It  should 
involve  a  knowledge  of  every  thing  that  would  fit  them 
for  the  work  of  life. 


NEW  YORK  AS  IT  WILL  BE. 


Realty  Owner. — Why  not  give  us  your  impressions 
of  the  next  twenty  years  ?  What  changes  are  likely  to 
occur  in  that  time  in  our  local  history  ? 

Sir  Oracle. — That  perhaps  is  a  natural  question  to 
ask  of  me,  but  it  is  difficult  to  say  any  thing  that  would 
seem  original.  I  have  been  over  the  ground  quite  often, 
but  perhaps  it  would  be  well  to  keep  a  few  salient  pos- 
sibilities in  mind. 

R.  O. — Do  you  think  that  the  population  of  New  York 
will  increase  as  rapidly  in  the  next  quarter  of  a  century 
as  it  has  in  the  last  twenty-five  years  ?  Are  there  not 
many  points  in  the  West  where  the  ratio  of  increase  will 
be  larger  ? 

Sir  O. — There  is  every  reason  to  believe  that  our 
population  will  keep  up  the  same  percentage  of  addition 
as  in  the  past,  but  of  course  relatively  there  are  larger  in- 
creases of  numbers  in  many  different  points  of  the  West, 
on  the  Pacific  coast,  and  even  in  the  South.  Kansas 
City,  Wachita,  Denver,  Minneapolis,  St.  Paul,  Los  An- 
geles, San  Diego,  are  among  the  places  where  the  rate  of 
increases  is  greater  than  here.  In  the  fulness  of  time  a 
mightier  city  than  New  York  will  be  developed  in  the 
region  west  of  the  lakes.  If  the  national  capitol  was  at 
St.  Louis,  I  should  expect  that  city  to  become  the  largest — 
that  is,  the  most  populous  and  wealthy  in  the  country  ; 

144 


NEW  YORK  AS  IT  WILL  BE.  I45 

for,  as  has  been  often  pointed  out,  the  great  centres  of 
population  of  the  world  are  not  made  so  by  commerce  or 
manufactures,  but  they  become  great  from  being  the  seats 
of  power.  It  is  monarchs  and  courts  and  parliaments 
which  draw  vast  throngs  of  people  to  certain  places. 
Look  at  the  map  of  the  world  :  the  great  cities — London, 
Paris,  Berlin,  Madrid,  Vienna,  Moscow,  Pekin,  Yeddo — 
are  all  inland  ;  they  are  or  were  the  capitals  of  their 
several  nations.  Our  Washington  is  an  exception,  be- 
cause it  is  badly  located.  Without  manufactures  or 
commerce  it  has  become  a  splendid  city.  New  York  is 
the  only  place  which  has  become  important,  because  of 
its  situation,  and  without  having  the  advantage  of  Con- 
gress or  court  to  give  it  preeminence. 

R.  O. — Well,  let  us  come  to  the  point.  Although  not 
the  seat  of  the  central  power,  do  you  still  think  New 
York  will  keep  its  present  prominence  during  the  next 
quarter  of  a  century? 

Sir  O. — Yes ;  I  think  during  the  next  decade  it  will 
increase  in  about  the  same  ratio  as  during  the  last  decade. 
Thus  in  twenty  years  our  population  ought  to  be  over 
two  millions  and  a  half.  But  I  am  further  of  the  impres- 
sion that  before  many  years  are  over,  Brooklyn  and  the 
surrounding  towns  will  form  an  integral  part  of  the 
metropolis.  Indeed  I  should  not  be  surprised  if  all  the 
population  surrounding  New  York  Bay,  including  the 
Jersey  shore,  was  made  into  a  State  of  the  Union.  Our 
interests  here  are  not  those  of  the  central  and  western 
parts  of  the  State,  and  I  foresee  a  fierce  antagonism  in 
the  future  between  this  port  and  Albany.  New  York  has 
only  two  Senators,  while  its  population  is  larger  than 
eight  other  States  that  could  be  named.  We  have  pre- 
cedents in  the  case  of  Massachusetts  and  Virginia,  form- 


146  GLIMPSES  OF  THE  FUTURE. 

ing  new  States  out  of  old  ones.  Maine  was  once  a  part 
of  the  Bay  State  and  West  Virginia  of  Virginia  proper. 
Texas  is  destined  to  be  cut  up  into  four  or  five  States. 
California  is  too  large  ;  so  is  Dakota. 

R.  O. — Will  New  York  become  more  or  less  thickly 
populated  in  the  future  ?  Will  not  the  numerous  rail- 
roads connecting  us  with  the  suburbs  extend  our  ter- 
ritory for  occupancy  at  the  expense  of  the  density  of 
population. 

Sir  O. — At  first  sight  it  would  seem  as  if  the  new  facili- 
ties for  getting  into  the  country  would  scatter  our  popula- 
tion and  give  us  fewer  residents  to  the  square  mile,  but, 
curiously  enough,  this  has  not  proved  true  in  the  past.  It 
was  after  the  elevated  roads  were  running  that  the  demand 
for  great  office  buildings  and  apartment  houses  set  in. 
We  had  the  three-story  brick  house  in  our  early  history. 
The  four-story  brown-stone  era  came  in  with  the  horse- 
cars.  Had  there  been  no  means  of  getting  up-town  more 
rapidly,  the  great  exchanges  would  have  been  forced  to 
change  their  location  to  Madison  Square  or  above.  But 
the  elevated  roads  have  concentrated  business  in  the 
lower  part  of  the  city,  and  it  will  stay  there  for  another 
century.  I  expect  to  see  the  ground  below  City  Hall 
Park  covered  with  enormously  high  houses,  and  probably 
ten  times  as  many  people  will  do  business  there  as  to- 
day. 

R.  O. — In  that  case  the  throngs  would  be  so  great  as  to 
make  the  streets  down-town  impassable. 

Sir  O.  That  will  be  true  if  facilities  are  not  afforded 
for  the  surplus  travel  in  underground  roads.  There  will 
be  a  sub-city  under  the  surface  of  the  ground  for  convey- 
ing people,  not  only  from  the  Battery  to  the  City  Hall 
Park,  but  also  from  the  East  to  the  North  River.     Then 


NEW  YORK  AS  IT  WILL  BE.  147 

I  expect  to  to  see  aerial  paths  connecting  the  various  tall 
buildings  that  have  elevators  one  with  the  other.  People 
who  wish  to  pass,  say  from  the  Mills  Building  in  Broad 
street  to  the  Boreel  Building  in  Broadway,  will  be  able  to 
do  so  over  a  wind-guarded  passageway  or  bridge  running 
over  the  tops  of  the  houses. 

R.  O. — You  look  for  increased  facilities  in  getting 
from  one  part  of  the  city  to  the  other,  and  also  to  the 
suburbs  ? 

Sir  O. — New  York  is  admirably  situated  for  transpor- 
tation purposes.  People  will  want  to  do  business  here 
because  of  the  economy  of  time  in  getting  from  one  busi- 
ness centre  to  another.  Street  cars  in  the  near  future 
will  only  be  used  for  short  distances,  and  will  in  time  be 
changed  to  cable  roads.  We  will  have  swift  transit  from 
the  Battery  to  the  Harlem  River,  and  branches  will  be 
built  to  connect  the  ferries  with  the  Central  rapid-transit 
steam  road.  Persons  who  read  these  lines  will  see  the 
day  when  they  can  travel  from  the  Battery  to  Harlem  in 
twenty  minutes,  and  can  reach  any  part  of  the  island 
from  any  other  part  in  thirty  minutes.  A  tunnel  is  under- 
way from  Jersey  City  to  New  York.  At  least  three  will 
be  built  under  the  East  River  between  New  York  and 
Brooklyn.  The  plans  for  a  second  bridge  over  the  East 
River  and  Blackwell's  Island  are  already  prepared,  and 
the  close  of  this  century  will  probably  see  the  construc- 
tion of  a  bridge  over  the  Hudson  between  Washington 
Heights  and  Fort  Lee.  Later  there  will  be  one  from 
Hoboken  to  the  central  zone  of  the  island.  Twenty 
years  will  see  our  water  front  vastly  improved  by  the  con- 
struction of  a  magnificent  dock  system,  the  work  on 
which  is  now  being  prosecuted.  Then  there  is  the  Harlem 
Canal  improvement  that  will  effect  a  mighty  change  in 


I48  GLIMPSES  OF  THE  FUTURE. 

the  future  of  the  metropolis.  It  "will  give  us  ten  more 
miles  of  docks  and  piers  in  which  to  transact  the  im- 
mense business  yet  to  be  done  on  either  side  of  the  Har- 
lem River.  Here  will  be  situated  some  of  our  largest 
markets  and  great  depots  for  coal,  lumber,  and  other 
building  materials.  In  time  the  railroads  will  discharge 
their  freight  into  foreign-bound  steamers  at  Port  Morris, 
hence  a  great  warehouse  system  will  grow  up  on  the 
Sound  and  river  fronts  adjacent  to  what  was  once  Hell 
Gate.  While  I  think  the  exchanges  will  remain  in  the 
lower  part  of  the  city,  I  look  for  the  great  commercial 
centre  to  grow  up  on  the  northeast  side  of  this  island  and 
on  the  opposite  shore  beyond  the  Harlem. 

R.  O. — How  about  our  street  and  sanitary  arrange- 
ments ?  When  the  population  becomes  dense,  will  the 
health  of  the  city  become  better  or  worse  ? 

Sir  O. — I  think  the  average  length  of  life  will  be  very 
much  increased  within  the  coming  twenty  years  ;  but  we 
must  reconstruct  our  sewers,  so  that  they  can  be  flushed 
every  twenty-four  hours  by  the  tides  of  the  East  and 
North  rivers.  Then  provision  must  be  made  for  gas  and 
water  pipes,  as  in  the  sewers  of  Paris,  which  are  large 
enough  to  accommodate  an  army.  There  is  a  law  in  our 
statute  books  appropriating  $1,000,000  yearly  for  con- 
structing small  parks  in  the  more  densely  settled  and 
poorer  districts.  This  will  rid  us  in  time  of  the  worst 
plague  spots  in  the  tenement  regions.  Our  building  laws 
and  Health  Board  no  longer  permit  the  construction  of 
unwholesome  tenements.  New  York  is  destined  to  be  a 
greater  warehouse  centre.  Its  importance  as  a  place  of 
business  is  growing,  and  this  will  relatively  lessen  the 
number  of  people  living  on  this  island.  There  will  be  a 
vast  population  in  the  region  beyond  the  Harlem,  which 


NEW  YOXK  AS  IT  WILL   BE.  1 49 

will  have  the  rare  advantage  T)f  a  wisely  planned  system 
of  rapid  transit.  The  people  who  live  in  this  region  will 
extol  the  memories  of  John  Mullaly,  and  the  gentlemen 
associated  with  him,  who  projected  the  splendid  system 
of  parks  and  parkways,  which  will  in  twenty  years  be  re- 
garded as  one  of  the  glories  of  the  metropolis.  The 
residential  New  York  of  the  future  will  extend  from  57th 
Street  up  to  Putnam  County  on  the  north,  and  to  the 
Connecticut  State  line  on  the  northeast. 

R.  O. — All  this  is  obvious  enough.  How  about  the 
government  of  the  city  ?  Will  the  "  Boodle  "  aldermen 
thrive  and  flourish  during  the  coming  twenty  years  ? 

Sir  O. — I  really  hope  we  will  have  better  government 
in  the  future.  Communities  go  through  three  experiences 
in  this  country,  At  the  beginning,  when  they  are  small 
and  every  one  knows  his  neighbor,  local  government  is 
honest  and  efficient.  The  most  perfect  and  purest  dem- 
ocratic government  the  world  ever  saw  was  that  of  a  New 
England  town-meeting.  But  when  trade  centres  become 
very  populous,  the  average  citizen  cares  more  for  his 
business  than  politics,  and  the  town-meeting  system  be- 
comes inadequate.  Then  the  wire-puller  and  the  "boss  " 
makes  his  appearance,  which  results  finally  in  Tweed 
rings  and  "  Boodle  "  aldermen.  But  when  cities  become 
really  great,  a  spirit  of  civic  pride  is  generated,  and  the 
better  classes  again  come  to  the  front.  It  is  noticed  that 
the  larger  the  locality  the  better  the  class  of  elected  pub- 
lic officers.  It  is  the  small  district  in  point  of  numbers 
which  chooses  the  poorest  representatives.  Our  mayors 
have  generally  been  honest  and  able  men,  and  in  the 
long  list  of  them  there  are  only  a  few  who  are  black 
sheep,  while  our  aldermen  have  nearly  always  been  cor- 
rupt.    Were  Brooklyn  joined   to   New  York,  and  the 


150  GLIMPSES  OF  THE  FUTURE. 

mayor  and  heads  of  departments  given  authority  and  re- 
sponsibility, I  believe  we  would  choose  first-class  rulers 
— men  after  the  type  of  Abram  S.  Hewitt  and  Seth 
Low.  The  citizens  of  a  really  big  city  would  never  de- 
liberately choose  fools  or  rascals  for  their  chief  executive 
officers. 


WHAT    SCIENCE    HAS   IN    STORE    FOR    US. 


Mr.  Newnotion. — We  had  a  severe  winter  last  year, 
Sir  Oracle.  Do  you  think  that  man  will  ever  be  able  to 
control  the  weather,  as  well  as  to  foretell  it  ?  Will  he 
ever  obtain  such  command  over  the  forces  of  nature  as 
to  be  able  to  subdue  the  rigors  of  winter  and  modify  the 
heats  of  summer  ? 

Sir  Oracle. — Man  does  this  in  a  measure  to-day  by 
his  clothing,  and  the  use  of  artificial  heat.  He  has  also 
invented  ice-making  machines,  and  proved  the  possibility 
of  cooling  houses,  halls,  and  theatres  during  the  heated 
terms  in  summer. 

Mr.  N. — We  understand  that,  of  course  ;  but  I  am  of 
the  impression  that  the  race  will  eventually  be  able  to 
put  a  stop  to  blizzards,  and  to  keep  the  temperature 
always  above  zero,  while  not  permitting  it  to  rise  as  high 
as  900  in  the  summer-time.  It  would  require  a  treatise 
to  explain  how  this  might  be  done,  but  I  believe  in  the 
generations  to  come  the  earth  in  all  its  parts  and  in  all 
its  seasons  will  permit  of  man  living  in  it  with  compara- 
tive comfort,  so  far  as  the  variation  of  the  weather  is 
concerned.  Then  we  know  that  inundations  and  droughts 
can  be  provided  against  by  the  growth  of  forests  in  the 
right  places. 

Sir  O. — It  is  rather  a  draft  on  our  credulity  to  be- 
lieve that  man  can  modify  the  different  temperatures  of 


152  GLIMPSES  OF  THE  FUTURE. 

all  parts  of  the  earth.  But  I  do  not  see  why  the  more 
favored  of  the  sons  of  men  may  not  sometime  or  other 
live  under  conditions  that  would  save  them  from  the 
bitter  blasts  of  winter  and  the  torrid  heats  of  summer. 
Writers  have  often  shown  how  possible  it  is  to  have  sani- 
tariums, consisting  of  an  inclosure  of  fifty  to  a  hundred 
acres  covered  by  glass  with  a  framework  of  iron.  Within 
this  inclosure  could  be  found  the  temperatures  and  the 
other  peculiarities  of  the  noted  health  resorts  of  the 
world,  such  as  Nice,  Mentone,  Florida,  Colorado,  and 
Southern  California.  I  believe  in  time  that  children  will 
be  born  and  live  to  an  old  age  without  ever  having  occa- 
sion to  breathe  the  outside  air,  or  to  be  exposed  to  the 
inclemency  of  the  weather  as  it  is  in  nature.  Man  is 
forced  to  live  an  artificial  life.  He  wears  clothes,  he 
dwells  in  houses,  he  eats  cooked  food  ;  but  so  far  he 
has  had  to  take  his  air  and  his  water  raw,  and  more  than 
half  the  acute  diseases  of  mankind  result  from  the  use  of 
air  and  water  as  we  find  them  in  nature.  They  must  be 
manipulated  and  made  wholesome.  We  cannot  afford  to 
drink  in  or  inhale  germs  of  disease  or  malarial  poisons. 

Mr.  N. — But  those  who  live  under  glass  cannot  very 
well  cultivate  the  earth  in  any  large  way.  I  am  in  hopes, 
however,  that  science  will  in  time  give  us  cheap  food 
products.  I  see  that  chemistry  now  furnishes  us  with  an 
alkaloid  which  is  even  better  than  quinine  as  a  drug.  It 
is  no  longer  necessary  to  grow  madder  or  indigo,  for  sub- 
stances that  replace  them  can  be  produced  artificially  and 
far  more  cheaply.  A  sugar  has  been  produced  from 
the  residuum  of  coal-tar  with  three  hundred  and  twenty 
times  more  sweetening  power  than  the  ordinary  sugar- 
cane. As  yet  it  is  very  dear,  but  there  is  no  reason  why 
we  should  not  in  time  dispense  with  the  labor  bestowed 


If  II AT  SCIENCE  HAS  IN  STORE  FOR  US.     I  53 

upon  the  sugar-cane  and  sorghum.  See  what  a  large 
portion  of  the  earth's  surface  could  then  be  put  to  other 
uses.  Some  chemists  are  of  the  opinion  that  tea,  alco- 
hol, most  of  the  drugs,  and  dye-stuffs  will  in  a  short  time 
be  produced  from  inorganic  materials.  We  are  entering 
upon  an  era  of  synthetic  chemistry — that  is,  scientific 
men  form  new  combinations  of  the  various  chemical  ele- 
ments, and  the  most  surprising  and  important  results  are 
thereby  rendered  possible.  Every  day  almost  we  hear 
of  a  new  explosive,  another  anaesthetic,  or  the  production 
of  what  was  formerly  regarded  as  organic  material  out  of 
the  inorganic  world.  It  is  from  this  source  that  we  must 
look  for  the  abolition  of  poverty.  Science  will  give  us  all 
we  require  to  live  on  this  earth  in  great  abundance  and 
at  a  mere  trifle  of  cost.  The  globe  will  then  be  able  to 
support  in  comfort  fifty  billion  of  people  instead  of  the 
1,300,000,000  now  supposed  to  be  on  its  surface,  the  vast 
bulk  of  whom  are  on  the  verge  of  starvation. 

Sir  O. — It  is  hard  to  put  any  limitations  to  what  man 
may  do  in  the  way  of  inventions  and  new  discoveries. 
He  is  undoubtedly  the  god  of  this  planet,  and  he  will  in 
time  dominate  the  entire  surface  of  the  globe.  Aeriel 
navigation  will  solve  the  mystery  of  the  poles,  and  even- 
tually there  will  be  no  "  dark  region  "  on  any  of  the  con- 
tinents. Waste  places  will  be  reclaimed,  deserts  made 
productive  by  irrigation,  forests  regrown  where  needed, 
and  waters  dyked  out  in  districts  where  the  same  condi- 
tions obtain  as  in  Holland.  These  changes  will  modify 
the  rigors  of  the  various  climates  of  the  world. 

Mr.  N. — Would  not  a  wide  canal  cutting  off  the  arctic 
regions,  from  the  continents  of  Asia  and  North  America, 
do  much  to  save  us  from  very  cold  weather  and  perhaps 
blizzards  ? 


I  54  GLIMPSES   OF  THE   FUTURE. 

Sir  O. — It  is  quite  true  that  Europe,  South  America, 
and  Africa  owe  much  of  their  immunity  from  severe  cold 
to  the  oceans  that  separate  them  from  the  polar  regions, 
but  it  seems  preposterous  to  hope  that  man  can  create 
the  same  watery  barriers  by  artificial  means. 

Mr.  N. — Yet  it  seems  there  are  artificial  canals,  eighty 
to  one  hundred  miles  wide,  on  the  planet  Mars.  Why 
may  we  not  discover  an  explosive  so  powerful  that 
mountain  ranges  may  be  torn  down,  and  vast  waterways, 
such  as  those  of  Mars,  reproduced  on  this  earth  ? 

Sir  O. — There  is  no  certainty  that  the  apparent  water- 
ways on  Mars  are  canals  at  all,  and  we  must  not  expect 
too  much  of  man's  inventive  genius.  Man  will  undoubt- 
edly make  this  earth  a  pleasanter  place  to  live  in,  and  he 
will  also  people  it  with  a  superior  race  that  will  enjoy  it 
more  than  we  do.  The  two  things  worth  living  for  are 
the  improvement  of  man  and  the  perfection  of  his  en- 
vironment. 

Mr.  N. — It  seems  to  me  that  man  will  some  time  be 
forced  to  remake  the  earth  he  lives  on.  I  judge  we  have 
very  little  idea  of  the  capabilities  of  the  soil  of  our  planet 
for  improvement.  I  think  it  safe  to  predict  that  any 
given  spot  on  the  earth  can,  by  proper  manipulation  of 
the  soil,  produce  a  hundred-fold  more  than  it  does  under 
the  system  of  agriculture  now  prevailing. 

Sir  O. — I  have  read  Prince  Krapotkin's  statement  of 
what  has  been  done  with  the  soil  near  Paris.  Then  there 
is  Mr.  Cole's  scheme  of  what  I  think  he  calls  "  sub- 
aqueous culture."  That  is,  he  utilizes  the  rivers,  and 
streams,  and  wells  to  keep  the  soil  constantly  moist.  It 
costs  some  four  to  five  hundred  dollars  an  acre,  but  it 
makes  the  land  for  agricultural  purposes  worth  literally 
thousands  of  dollars  an  acre. 

Mr.   N. — I   know   nothing  of   the    researches  of   the 


WHAT  SCIENCE  HAS  IN  STORE  EOR  US.     I  55 

Prince  or  the  experiments  of  Mr.  Cole  ;  but  for  twenty 
years  at  least  I  have  been  satisfied  that  man  would  recon- 
struct the  soil  from  which  he  extracts  his  sustenance. 
We  know  that  in  some  places  there  is  too  much  clay,  in 
others  too  much  sand.  I  do  not  see  why,  with  our  rail- 
road system,  we  cannot  bring  the  clay  to  the  sand,  and 
vice  versa.  We  know  what  marvels  have  been  wrought 
in  the  past  by  irrigation.  Now,  I  believe  this  system  of 
treating  the  soil  will  be  as  valuable  in  rainy  as  in  rainless 
regions  of  the  earth.  With  proper  systems  of  drains  and 
reservoirs,  no  part  of  the  soil  need  be  too  dry  or  too  wet. 
It  is  estimated,  I  believe,  that  there  are  now  1,300,000,- 
000  people  on  the  surface  of  the  globe.  It  may  seem 
wild,  but  I  think  that  this  earth  in  time  will  support  in 
comfort  50,000,000,000  of  people. 

Sir  O. — Well,  that  does  seem  extravagant.  You  do 
not  agree  with  Malthus,  then,  that  the  earth  can  become 
over-populated,  and  that  wars,  pestilences,  and  human 
vices  are  agencies  not  wholly  bad,  inasmuch  as  they  keep 
down  the  human  surplus  ? 

Mr.  N. — While  I  most  profoundly  believe  that  man  will 
obtain  such  control  of  land  and  sea  as  to  multiply  indefi- 
nitely the  food  supply,  I  nevertheless  hold  it  to  be  equally 
true  that  we  must  in  some  way  control  the  production  of 
human  beings.  If  ever  society  is  dominated  by  the 
scientific  spirit,  children  will  not  be  born  haphazard  as 
they  are  now.  Criminals,  the  insane,  and  the  diseased 
will  not  be  permitted  to  imperil  future  generations  by 
bringing  into  the  world  undesirable  and  miserable  off- 
spring. We  will  breed  from  the  best,  not  from  the  worst. 
How  this  is  to  be  brought  about  I  do  not  know,  but  the 
progress  and  victories  of  science  in  the  inorganic  world 
will  appear  trifling  when  the  organized  experience  of  the 
race  includes  the  organic  world. 


TRAVELLING    THROUGH    THE    AIR. 


Querist. — I  see  that  Captain  Renard  of  the  French 
Army  claims  to  have  solved  the  problem  of  aerial  navi- 
gation— that  is,  he  is  able  to  guide  a  vessel  through  the 
air  against  the  wind.  This  is  a  very  suggestive  fact,  I 
think. 

Sir  Oracle. — I  really  believe  we  are  on  the  eve 
of  an  earnest  effort  by  inventors  and  enterprising 
wealthy  men  to  solve  all  the  problems  connected  with 
aerial  navigation.  We  live  in  an  inventive  and  specula- 
tive era,  and  there  is  something  about  aerial  navigation 
which  appeals  not  only  to  the  hope  of  gain,  but  to  the 
imagination  of  mankind.  Before  the  close  of  this  cen- 
tury tens  of  millions  of  dollars  and  thousands  of  lives 
will  be  sacrificed  so  that  the  race  can  have  as  complete 
control  of  the  air  as  it  has  of  land  and  water  in  travelling 
from  one  point  to  another. 

Querist. — But  look  at  the  very  slow  progress  of  bal- 
looning. It  is  one  hundred  years  since  the  Mongolfiers 
ascended  by  means  of  hot  air.  Since  then  thousands  of 
balloons  filled  with  hydrogen  gas  have  been  sent  up,  but 
their  great  bulk  and  lightness  made  them  the  sport  of 
the  air  currents.  Scarcely  any  progress  was  made  up  to 
the  time  Captain  Renard  made  use  of  the  electric  accu- 
mulator invented  by  Faure  and  improved  by  Siemens. 

Sir  O. — That  is  true,  but  luckily  the  science  and  in- 
156 


TRAVELLING  THROUGH  THE  AIR.  I  57 

vention  of  the  age  have  solved  so  many  problems  in  elec- 
tricity that  we  are  now  in  a  position  to  use  it  to  advan- 
tage as  a  motive  power,  not  only  on  land  and  water,  but 
through  the  air.  The  days  of  steam  as  a  motor  seem  to 
be  numbered  ;  electricity  or  some  other  force  is  destined 
to  take  its  place. 

Querist. — But  will  gas  be  used  in  the  air-ships  of  the 
future  ?  Birds  and  insects  get  through  the  atmosphere  in 
twelve  different  ways  without  using  gas  at  all ;  sometimes  by 
the  aid  of  powerful  wings,  such  as  those  of  the  eagle,  the 
vulture,  or  the  hawk  ;  at  other  times  by  a  thin  extended 
membrane,  such  as  that  of  the  butterfly  and  numerous 
insects.  Must  man  utilize  something  different  from  any 
thing  in  nature  and  use  a  gas  as  well  as  a  motor  un- 
known to  the  birds  which  travel  through  the  air  ? 

Sir  O. — It  would  seem  so.  Man's  methods  are  not  al- 
ways those  of  nature.  I  am  inclined  to  believe  that  the 
perfected  air-ship  will  not  need  to  use  gas.  It  has  long 
been  predicted  that  whenever  a  motorial  power  could  be 
created  that  would  overcome  the  weight  of  the  machinery 
that  generated  it,  then  the  problem  of  aerial  navigation 
was  solved.  If  a  steam-engine  could  raise  a  machine 
containing  a  man,  and — engine,  machine,  and  man — not 
weighing  over  three  hundred  pounds,  why  all  difficulty 
was  at  an  end.  But,  unfortunately,  boilers,  engines,  and 
coal  are  so  weighty  that  you  cannot  produce  power 
enough  to  overcome  their  gravity.  But  the  electric 
accumulator  does  not  need  coal,  and  generates  great 
power  compared  with  its  weight.  Its  prime  defect 
is  its  inability  to  create  new  power,  hence  the  Renard 
machine  can  stay  in  the  air  but  four  hours,  the  accumu- 
lators then  having  to  be  recharged  with  electricity. 

Querist. — You  think,  then,  that  wiser  inventors  will 


1 58  GLIMPSES  OF  THE   FUTURE. 

confine  their  investigations  to  the  motive  power  rather 
than  to  the  shape  of  the  balloon  or  the  making  it 
buoyant  with  gas  ? 

Sir  O. — Yes,  though  I  think  it  likely  for  the  time  gas 
will  be  found  useful.  I  have  supposed  that  a  metal  like 
aluminum,  for  instance,  would  replace  silk.  Aluminum 
is  very  light,  inoxidizable,  and  no  gas  could  escape  from 
it.  With  this  metal,  the  machine  could  not  be  easily 
injured,  and  it  could  stand  hard  knocks. 

Querist. — But  the  point  is  not  how  balloons  are  to 
be  made  or  what  the  motive  power  is  to  be,  but  what 
marked  changes  will  be  effected  by  aerial  navigation. 
Will  not  the  air-ships  be  a  standing  bear  argument  against 
railway  stock  ? 

Sir  O. — The  present  generation  of  speculators  will,  I 
judge,  have  passed  away  before  the  passenger  air-vessel 
is  able  to  compete  with  the  Pullman  car,  and  yet  I  have 
no  doubt  we  shall  in  our  own  day  see  prodigious  efforts 
made  to  perfect  machines  for  getting  through  the  air.  It 
may  be  the  gigantic  speculation  of  the  close  of  this  cen- 
tury. See  what  millions  of  capital  have  been  created  to 
handle  the  telegraph,  the  telephone,  and  the  electric  light. 
But  for  every  dollar  of  stock  created  by  these  three  in- 
ventions, you  will  see  a  thousand  put  into  the  capital  of 
companies  that  will  aim  at  navigating  the  atmosphere. 

Querist. — You  seem  to  dwell  upon  this  point. 

Sir  O. — Yes,  because  it  is  the  only  obvious  one.  It  is 
what  will  most  interest  wealthy  and  enterprising  people. 
He  who  owns  stock  in  an  aerial  company  based  on  a 
patent  for  a  successful  machine  will  be  in  luck.  I 
hardly  like  to  speculate  upon  the  changes  which  aerial 
navigation  will  bring  about  in  the  travel  and  business  of 
the  world.       It  is  curious  to  notice  that  in  Europe  the 


TRAVELLING  THROUGH  THE  AIR.  I  59 

chief  interest  is  in  army  and  navy  circles.  It  is  the  use 
that  can  be  made  of  air  vessels  to  destroy  cities,  inspect 
hostile  camps  and  fortresses,  and  throw  destructive  mis- 
siles into  an  enemy's  ship  of  war.  Captain  Renard  de- 
clares that  he  can  construct  a  machine  which  will  convey 
a  hundred  soldiers  through  the  air.  Perhaps  aerial 
science  may  be  benefited  by  organized  bureaus,  such  as 
that  of  the  army  and  navy  departments,  conducting  the 
first  experiments.  But  clearly  the  larger  use  of  the  air- 
ship will  not  be  for  war  and  destruction,  but  for  man's 
happiness  and  convenience.  It  will  make  all  parts  of 
the  earth  accessible  to  him.  There  will  be  no  "  dark 
continents "  when  air-ships  abound,  and  the  mystery 
not  only  of  the  North  but  of  the  South  Pole  will  be 
solved  just  as  soon  as  it  is  possible  to  travel  a  thousand 
miles  through  the  atmosphere.  Of  course  one  change 
will  be  in  the  spread  of  population.  As  it  is  easier  to 
fly  from  hill-top  to  hill-top  than  from  valley  to  valley, 
the  latter  will  lose  in  population,  and  the  former  gain. 
If  the  aerostat  should  become  as  cheap  for  travellers  as 
the  sailing  vessel,  why  may  not  man  become  migratory, 
like  the  birds,  occupying  the  more  mountainous  regions 
and  sea-coast  in  summer  and  more  tropical  climes  in 
winter.  Of  course  all  this  seems  very  wild,  but  we  live 
in  an  age  of  scientific  marvels,  and  the  navigation  of  the 
air,  if  accomplished,  would  be  the  most  momentous  event 
of  all  the  ages.  It  will  do  more  to  change  human  con- 
ditions than  any  invention  in  the  past.  The  use  of  fire, 
of  iron  ;  the  invention  of  gunpowder  and  of  printing  ; 
the  discovery  of  America, — all  these  are  landmarks  in 
the  history  of  man,  but  what  are  they  to  the  navigation 
of  the  air  ?  I  am  not,  I  think,  expecting  too  much.  I  do 
not  see  how  heavy  freight  can  ever  be  carried  through 


l6o  GLIMPSES  OF  THE  FUTURE. 

the  atmosphere,  but  passengers  certainly  will ;  but  I  do  not 
expect  that  this  will  be  a  cheap  means  of  transit.  Most 
of  our  inventions  are  costly.  The  tallow  candle  is  the 
cheapest  form  of  light  ;  whale  oil  was  an  improvement 
for  illuminating  purposes.  Kerosene,  gas,  the  electric 
light  were  better  illuminants  in  the  order  named,  but 
they  were  also  dearer  in  the  same  order.  Walking  is 
cheaper  than  sailing  at  sea  ;  that  costs  less  than  horse- 
power, horse-power  less  than  steam-power,  and  the 
electric  motor,  while  it  gives  promise  of  better  results, 
will,  in  all  probability,  be  the  dearest  kind  of  locomotion. 
People  who  take  air-ships  will  for  many  years  find  it  a 
costly  luxury.  But  it  will  serve  to  cheapen  other  forms 
of  transit. 


THE    UTILIZATION    OF    DREAMS. 


Mr.  Fanciful. — Why  should  not  dreams  be  manip- 
ulated ;  or,  in  other  words,  may  it  not  be  possible  to 
stimulate  the  nerve-centres  of  man  so  as  to  induce  during 
sleep  pleasurable  dreams  or  visions  ? 

Sir  Oracle. — That  seems  rather  a  fanciful  idea,  and 
I  am  afraid  our  readers  will  hardly  think  the  topic  worth 
discussing.     Explain  yourself. 

Mr.  F. — As  this  is  rather  a  hobby  of  mine,  I  hope  our 
readers  will  try  and  follow  my  thought.  I  have  been 
talking  and  writing  about  this  matter  for  twenty  years 
without  having  any  response.  Still,  I  am  like  a  mother 
with  a  deformed  child.  I  lay  more  store  on  this  dream 
hobby  of  mine  than  on  any  other  offspring  of  my  brain. 

Sir  O. — Well,  proceed.  How  do  you  expect  to  control 
dreams  ? 

Mr.  F. — It  will  be  conceded  that  the  visions  of  the 
night  are  due  to  certain  physical  conditions  of  our  body. 
If  I  eat  a  late  supper,  partaking  of  lobster  salad  or  ter- 
rapin stew,  the  chances  are  that  when  I  go  to  bed,  if  I 
lie  on  my  back,  I  shall  have  a  nightmare.  Certainly  I 
shall  have  troubled  dreams.  On  the  other  hand,  if  I 
allow  a  good  interval  between  my  supper  and  my  sleep, 
I  shall  have  pleasant  dreams,  if  I  have  any  at  all,  espe- 
cially if  I  have  spent  the  evening  without  any  bodily  strain 
pr  mental  excitement. 

161 


1 62  GLIMPSES  OF  THE  FUTURE. 

Sir  O. — What  you  say  is  true  enough.  Moreover,  it  is 
a  fact  beyond  dispute  that  our  dreams  are  influenced  by 
the  stimulants  and  narcotics  we  may  have  taken  during 
the  evening. 

Mr.  F. — I  was  coming  to  that.  I  think  it  will  be  found 
that  our  nightly  visions  are  colored,  if  I  may  use  that 
term,  by  the  intoxicants  or  narcotics  we  have  imbibed 
before  going  to  bed.  Your  drinker  of  ale  or  porter  will 
not  have  the  same  visions  as  the  partaker  of  champagne. 
Then  the  stronger  liquors,  such  as  whiskey  and  brandy, 
will  excite  our  dream-producing  machinery  in  still  an- 
other way.  Of  course,  it  often  happens  that  these  alco- 
holic drinks  produce  a  kind  of  stupor  in  which  there  are 
no  dreams,  or,  at  least,  none  that  we  recall  in  our  waking 
hours. 

Sir  O. — I  was  going  to  say  that  in  all  probability  the 
brain  is  constantly  active  during  sleep,  and  the  dreams 
that  we  recall  when  awake  are  not  a  hundredth  part  of  the 
visions  which  float  through  our  minds  during  the  still 
watches  of  the  night.  We  know  that  during  slumber  all 
our  bodily  functions  continue.  The  liver  and  kidneys 
secrete,  the  blood  circulates,  our  lungs  inhale  and  ex- 
hale. The  brain  alone  seems  to  be  under  a  cloud — in  a 
state  of  oblivion,  as  it  were. 

Mr.  F. — That  is  why  I  call  my  conceit  the  utilization 
of  sleep.  Why  should  we  pass  one  third  of  our  life  in 
this  mock  death.  Would  I  not  be  a  great  benefactor  to 
the  race  if  I  could  make  sleep  conscious  and  pleasurable, 
so  that  the  mind  of  man,  which  is  now  as  it  were  under 
a  cloud  of  thick  darkness  on  an  average  eight  hours  in 
twenty-four,might  become  pleasurably  conscious  of  itself  ? 

Sir  O. — You  recall  Tom  Moore's  lines;  I  quote  from 
memory  : 


THE  UTILIZATION  OF  DREAMS.  1 63 

"  It 's  never  too  late  for  delight,  my  dear  ; 
For  the  best  of  all  ways 
To  lengthen  your  days 
Is  to  steal  a  few  hours  from  the  night,  my  dear." 

Mr.  F. — I  do  not  mean  this  as  a  joke.  I  am  in  dead 
earnest.  I  deny,  or  at  least  doubt,  the  probability  of 
personal  immortality.  But  if  my  theory  is  of  any  value, 
science  can  give  to  man  reons  of  pleasurable  existence 
as  a  compensation. 

Sir  O. — Well,  that  is  an  astounding  claim.  Explain 
yourself. 

Mr.  F. — So  far,  in  my  argument,  I  have  tried  to 
prove  that  our  dreams  are  subjected  to  physical  con- 
ditions largely  controllable  by  man  himself.  Now  let 
us  consider  the  lessons  taught  us  by  the  use  of  opium, 
Indian  hemp,  and  other  narcotics.  These  exercise  a 
certain  subtle  influence  on  the  nerves  and  brain  which 
gives  the  human  subject  the  most  powerful  visions.  Read 
De  Quincey's  "Confessions  of  an  Opium-Eater."  He 
but  tells  the  story  of  tens  of  thousands  of  persons  who 
have  formed  the  morphine  or  opium  habit.  In  the  East, 
especially  in  China,  myriads  of  people  have  experienced 
the  delights  as  well  as  the  reactions  which  result  from  the 
use  of  opiates.  This  is  a  chapter  in  human  history  which 
has  never  been  adequately  treated  by  any  recognized 
authority. 

Sir  O. — We  know  enough  about  opium  to  warn  us  to 
avoid  it,  lest  we  become  a  slave  to  a  most  degrading 
vice.  It  is  true  that  De  Quincey,  the  poet  Coleridge,  and 
others  have  been  lifted  into  a  seventh  heaven  of  delight 
by  using  this  mysterious  drug,  but  the  reaction  has  been 
as  painful  as  the  first  effect  was  pleasurable.  The  opium- 
eater  is  one  of  the  most  unhappy  of  human  beings.     It 


164  GLIMPSES  OF  THE  FUTURE. 

seems  to  be  a  law  of  nature  that  whatever  unduly  excites 
correspondingly  depresses  our  nervous  system. 

Mr.  F. — I  am  not  so  sure  about  that.  Take  the  ex- 
ample of  oxygen-gas  exhilaration.  Here  is  a  case  in 
which  there  is  no  corresponding  depression  or  exhaus- 
tion. We  have  all  seen  people  under  the  influence  of 
nitrous-oxide  or  laughing-gas.  Properly  used,  no  ill  ef- 
fects have  followed  the  stimulation.  Indeed,  oxygen 
combined  with  nitrogen  is  just  now  very  popular  with 
physicians,  who  give  it  to  stimulate  wholesomely  the 
waning  strength  of  sick  people.  Up  to  date  there  have 
been  some  seventeen  different  anaesthetics  discovered. 
Their  effects  on  the  human  system  vary.  We  know  how 
valuable  cocaine  is  and  also  how  dangerous.  Now  my 
hope  is  that  other  compounds  like  laughing-gas  will  be 
discovered  which  will  pleasantly  stimulate  our  nervous 
system  without  being  followed  by  any  baneful  reaction. 

Sir  O. — "  May  bees  do  not  fly  only  one  month  of  the 
year."  Where  do  your  countless  aeons  of  delight  come 
in  during  the  hours  of  sleep  ? 

Mr.  F. — I  hold  that  science  has  not  yet  been  brought 
to  bear  upon  man  himself  except  in  a  partial  way.  Our 
organized  human  experience  has  been  dealing  with  the 
inorganic  world  with  wonderful  results.  Mathematics, 
astronomy,  as  well  as  other  of  the  physical  sciences,  have 
received  a  great  deal  of  attention  from  the  race.  Chem- 
istry, it  is  said,  dates  from  the  discovery  of  oxygen  gas 
by  Priestley  something  over  a  century  back  ;  but  biology, 
is  yet  in  its  infancy  as  a  science.  Further  along  in  the 
history  of  the  race,  man  himself  and  society  will  come 
under  the  domain  of  science. 

Sir  O. — Well !  well  !  this  is  rather  an  old  story.  What 
has  this  got  to  do  with  dreams  stretched  over  ages  of  time  ? 


THE  UTILIZATION  OF  DREAMS.  165 

Mr.  F. — I  have  pointed  out  the  possibility  that  com- 
pounds will  be  discovered  which  will  have  all  the  virtues 
and  none  of  the  defects  of  opium.  And  now  for  the 
statement  of  a  curious  fact  which  is  not  generally  under- 
stood. Time  and  space  have  nothing  to  do  with  dreams. 
You  know  the  contention  of  many  philosophers  that  time 
and  space  are  subjective  conditions.  They  are  the  vest- 
ments, as  it  were,  of  our  conscious  life,  and  have  no  ex- 
istence in  reality.  However  this  may  be,  it  is  a  fact 
beyond  all  dispute  that  dreams  are  not  bounded.  Space 
and  time  do  not  control  them.  Instances  are  upon 
record  when  dreams  seemed  to  occupy  years,  when 
really  they  had  consumed  only  a  few  moments  of  abso- 
lute time.  I  could  easily  refer  to  instances,  but  it  would 
prolong  this  conversation  unnecessarily.  You  see  all 
that  is  needed  is  to  get  the  human  body  into  the 
right  conditions,  apply  the  compound  I  said  would  yet 
be  discovered,  and  the  brain  of  the  sleeping  man  would 
give  birth  to  visions  as  magnificent,  as  varied,  and  as  de- 
lightful as  those  which  were  experienced  by  the  opium- 
stimulated  brains  of  De  Quincey  and  Coleridge.  And 
they  would  last  apparently  for  numberless  years  without 
any  distressful  physical  or  nervous  reaction.  The  latest 
word  in  philosophy  deprived  us  of  any  hope  of  a  con- 
scious life  hereafter,  but  science  may  yet  give  us  what 
may  be  called  a  subjective  immortality  every  night  we 
lay  down  to  sleep.  Such  is  my  theory,  Sir  Oracle.  It 
may  be  a  dream  in  itself,  but  I  would  like  to  put  it  on 
record  to  be  passed  upon  by  the  scientist  of  the  year 
2000. 

Sir  O. — It  is  curious  you  have  not  mentioned  the  word 
hypnotism  or  animal  magnetism  in  connection  with  this 
matter.      You    are   looking   for   some  drug — an   opiate 


I  66  GLIMPSES  OF  THE  FUTURE. 

robbed  of  its  horrors — to  affect  the  nervous  systems  of 
men  and  women.  May  not  a  powerful  personality  be 
able  to  impress  itself  upon  a  sensitive  subject,  and  in- 
duce these  beatific  visions  which  you  think  will  occupy 
the  sleeping  hours  of  man  in  the  future.  A  great  deal 
that  is  done  with  hypnotic  subjects  is  simply  the  inducing 
of  dreams,  of  which  the  subjects  are  more  or  less  con- 
scious. 

Mr.  F. — But  I  would  not  confine  this  to  the  so-called 
sensitives.  So  far  the  investigations  go  to  show  that  only 
certain  persons  are  susceptible,  certainly  not  more  than 
one  in  every  seven  adults.  Still  I  do  not  think  that  sci- 
entists will  be  confined  to  any  one  or  two  drugs  or  any  lim- 
ited methods,  in  influencing  the  nervous  sensibilities  of 
that  wonderful  machine  we  call  man.  You  have  heard  of 
the  harp  of  a  thousand  strings  ;  but  what  is  that  to  this 
marvellous  integration  of  passions,  sentiments,  thoughts, 
and  sensations  which  go  to  make  up  the  whole  round  of 
human  nature. 

Sir  O. — Well,  you  have  started  an  interesting  train  of 
thoughts  and  have  given  a  hint  to  the  scientists  to  in- 
stitute a  series  of  experiments  in  an  entirely  new  depart- 
ment of  human  nature. 


SOME  ODD  CONCEITS. 


Mr.  Fanciful. — What  do  you  say  to  a  conversation 
about  weeds  ? 

Sir  Oracle. — Are  they  worth  discussing  ?  Is  it  not 
our  business  to  get  rid  of  them  by  every  means  in  our 
power  ? 

Mr.  F. — I  am  not  so  sure  of  that.  Some  of  our  most 
valuable  foods  were  once  weeds,  as  witness  wheat  and 
nearly  all  the  other  cereals.  The  history  of  our  fruits  and 
of  many  of  our  kitchen-garden  vegetables  should  make  us 
tolerant  at  least  of  even  noxious  plants,  large  numbers  of 
which  have  been  cultivated — and  shall  I  say  humanized? — 
to  fit  them  for  the  uses  of  the  race.  I  do  not  think  that 
people  have  emphasized  sufficiently  the  fact  that  to  man 
himself  must  be  given  the  credit  of  having  rescued  from 
waste  and  chaos  the  plants  which  now  nourish  and  sustain 
his  life  on  this  planet. 

Sir  O. — Well,  go  ahead.  Explain  yourself.  What  do 
you  want  to  do  with  weeds  ? 

Mr.  F. — Cultivate  them. 

Sir  O. — I  think  I  catch  your  meaning.  If  wheat  and 
rye  were  once  worthless  weeds,  if  celery  was  originally  a 
poisonous  plant,  you  would  like  to  see  what  would  be 
the  result  were  experiments  to  be  instituted,  developing 
the  possibilities  of  the  myriads  of  weeds  and  other  appa- 
rently useless  plants,  which  now  are  pests  and  hindrances 
to  the  agriculturist. 

167 


1 68  GLIMPSES  OF  THE  FUTURE. 

Mr.  F. — You  have  got  my  idea  exactly.  I  am  not  a 
believer  in  final  causes  ;  and  I  do  not  argue  that  the 
Canadian  thistle  or  the  milk-weed  was  intended  finally  to 
be  of  value  to  the  race.  But  we  know  that  certain  weeds 
such  as  the  dandelion  make  good  salads,  and  still  others 
have  a  medicinal  value  ;  and  it  seems  to  me  there  ought 
to  be  some  intelligent  effort  made  to  try  and  utilize  all 
the  plants  which  our  earth  so  abundantly  produces.  If 
not  valuable  as  food,  they  may  have  some  use  for 
clothing. 

Sir  O. — What  have  you  to  propose  ? 

Mr.  F. — That  some  rich  man  or  woman  should  make  a 
large  bequest  for  the  deliberate  cultivation  of  weeds.  I 
am  quite  sure  it  would  pay  a  hundred-fold  in  the  discov- 
ery of  valuable  material  now  wasted. 

Sir  O. — I  venture  to  say  that,  if  any  wealthy  person 
made  such  a  will  and  his  disinherited  relatives  tested  the 
matter  in  the  courts,  it  would  be  set  aside  on  the  ground 
that  the  testator  was  a  lunatic. 

Mr.  F. — Well  !  let  us  change  the  subject.  I  have  an- 
other lunacy,  if  you  may  call  it  such,  respecting  the  novel 
or  the  romance  of  the  future.  Up  to  date,  the  Scotts, 
George  Eliots,  Stevensons,  and  Haggards  have  been 
forced  to  describe  scenes,  persons,  and  their  peculiari- 
ties by  words.  True,  pictures  have  been  occasionally 
used  to  illustrate  the  author's  text  ;  but  why  should  not 
modern  art  and  invention  go  a  great  deal  further.  Let  us 
take  the  case  of  a  novel  now  exciting  a  good  deal  of  in- 
terest— "  Robert  Elsmere."  It  opens  with  a  two-page 
description  of  rural  scenery  in  the  north  of  England. 
Now  I  confess  words  rarely  give  me  an  idea  of  natural 
scenery.  Suppose  the  work  should  have  begun  with  the 
picture  of  a  landscape.    Then  any  person  with  eyes  could 


SOME   ODD   CONCEITS.  1 69 

get  a  vivid  impression  of  the  villas,  valleys,  streams,  foli- 
age, and  habitations  in  a  given  region. 

Sir  O. — But  softly,  would  not  the  element  of  color  be 
lacking  ?  Black  and  white  convey  only  a  relative  idea  of 
a  beautiful  scene.  You  still  have  to  imagine  the  blue  of 
the  sky,  the  green  of  the  grass,  the  brown  sand,  and  the 
neutral  tints  of  the  water. 

Mr.  F. — You  seem  to  forget  the  marvels  of  chromo- 
lithography.  It  is  now  possible  to  put  in  twenty  colors 
on  one  plate,  and  to  give  all  the  tints  of  nature  with 
singular  fidelity.  True  the  chromo  of  to-day  is  looked 
upon  as  crude  and  inartistic  ;  but  I  venture  to  predict 
that  it  will  be  so  far  perfected  as  to  allow  any  well-to-do 
family  to  have  art  galleries  of  their  own,  in  which  will 
be  found  reproductions  of  all  the  great  paintings  of  the 
ancient  and  modern  world.  The  crowning  glory  of  our 
age  will  be  when  the  highest  art  is  brought  within  the 
reach  of  the  poorest  purse. 

Sir  O. — This  is  a  digression.  Tell  us  more  about  your 
novel  of  the  future. 

Mr.  F. — As  with  the  scenery,  so  with  the  characters 
of  the  works  of  fiction  I  am  describing.  Robert  Els- 
mere,  Catherine  Langham,  and  the  other  individuals, 
would  all  be  reproduced  pictorially.  This  would  dis- 
pense with  a  great  deal  of  description,  and  much  of  the 
verbiage  could  be  cut  out.  Then  the  reader's  conception 
of  the  characters  would  necessarily  be  much  more  vivid. 
Nor  is  this  all.  Why  should  not  a  number  of  graphophones 
be  made  use  of,  giving  the  words  of  the  various  conver- 
sations in  the  tones  they  would  naturally  use.  An  au- 
thor then  would  employ  a  number  of  men  and  women  of 
various  ages  to  personate  his  characters.  They  would 
be  like  the  models  of  an  artist. 


170  GLIMPSES  OF  THE  FUTURE. 

Sir  O. — It  seems  to  me  that  in  that  case  a  novel  or 
romance  could  best  be  given  in  a  public  hall,  with  a 
stereopticon  for  the  scenes,  characters,  and  action,  and 
the  graphophone  to  give  voice  to  the  conversations. 

Mr.  F. — That  would  make  a  kind  of  drama  of  it,  al- 
though without  actual  actors.  It  would  be  pictures 
and  voices.  And  that  reminds  me,  I  do  not  see  why  the 
stereopticon  is  not  more  used  in  schools,  instead  of  text- 
books, for  giving  children  an  idea  of  history,  geography, 
and  the  habits,  and  scenery  of  distant  countries  and  their 
inhabitants.  Education  should  appeal  more  to  the  eye 
and  to  the  imagination,  and  not  depend  so  much  on  words. 

Sir  O. — Have  you  any  other  lunacies  to  ventilate  in 
this  conversation? 

Mr.  F. — Yes,  just  one  more.  The  electric  light,  for 
working  purposes,  will  turn  night  into  day.  Buildings 
and  public  works  can  now  be  constructed  as  readily 
from  9  p.m.  to  5  a.m.  as  during  daylight.  In  view  of  this 
fact  it  seems  to  me  absurd  to  ask  laborers  to  toil  during 
mid-day  in  the  hot  summer  months.  Why  should  they 
not  do  their  work  instead  during  the  cooler  hours  of  the 
nights  ?  There  are  many  occupations  now  carried  on 
after  dark,  such  as  type-setting,  presswork,  horse-car 
driving,  and  the  like.  Policemen  have  to  be  on  their 
beat;  and  then  marketmen  and  milkmen  must  be  astir  long 
before  daylight.  How  absurd  it  is  for  every  one  to  work 
and  play  at  the  same  hours.  Why  should  not  stores  be 
open  in  the  evening,  like  theatres.  It  would  add  to  the 
gayety  and  brilliancy  of  the  streets  in  our  principal 
cities.  Then  these  great  emporiums  of  business  need 
not  open  until  n  a.m.  I  believe  that  six  hours  a  day  is 
as  much  as  any  one  should  work,  either  with  hand  or 
brain.     Then  with  the  electric  light  I   do  not  see  why 


SOME   ODD   CONCEITS.  \J\ 

photographers  and  dentists  should  not  pursue  their  vo- 
cations when  the  bulk  of  people  have  leisure — that  is,  in 
the  evening  and  at  night. 

Sir  O. — -But  is  it  not  a  plain  requirement  of  nature 
that  we  should  rest  at  night  and  work  during  the  day  ? 

Mr.  F. — I  do  not  believe  that  policemen,  compositors, 
marketmen,  milkmen,  and  others  who  work  at  night  and 
sleep  during  the  day  are  any  less  healthy  or  shorter-lived 
than  those  who  follow  trades  which  allow  them  to  sleep 
at  night  and  work  during  the  daytime.  Take  the  case  of 
English  Parliamentary  statesmen  :  Palmerston,  Disraeli, 
Lord  John  Russell,  and  Mr.  Gladstone  are  among  the 
instances  of  men  who  have  lived  long  lives,  and  yet  have 
turned  night  into  day,  so  far  as  hard  work  was  con- 
cerned. English  statesmen  eat  a  heavy  dinner  at  8 
o'clock  p.m.,  and  make  their  most  important  speeches 
after  midnight  ;  yet  as  a  rule  they  have  been  long-lived. 
Indeed  with  the  electric  light  I  think  it  possible  even  for 
agricultural  laborers  to  work  during  the  cool  of  the  night, 
instead  of  under  the  burning  rays  of  the  mid-day  sun. 
They  might  not  be  able  to  take  in  hay  while  the  dew  is 
falling,  but  they  could  plant  and  plow  and  hoe,  as  well 
as  gather  certain  crops. 

Sir.  O. — There  may  be  something  in  what  you  say, 
but  it  is  not  easy  to  change  one's  habits.  I  judge  by  the 
close  of  the  twentieth  century  the  bulk  of  the  race  will 
do  their  work  during  the  daytime,  take  their  pleasure  in 
the  evening,  and  do  most  of  their  sleeping  at  night. 

Mr.  F. — While  we  are  on  this  subject  of  light,  I  want 
to  sun  still  another  theory  of  mine.  I  hold  the  literature 
of  the  future  ought  to  be  issued  in  the  colors  of  nature. 
Our  books,  magazines,  and  newspapers  are  now  printed 
in  black  ink  on  white  paper.     Now  black  is  simply  the 


172  GLIMPSES   OF  THE  FUTURE. 

absence  of  all  color,  and  white  is  properly  the  presence 
of  all  colors.  We  could  not  see  in  a  black  world.  That 
pure  white  is  destructive  to  the  sense  of  sight,  is  shown 
by  the  presence  of  ophthalmic  diseases  in  the  snowy  polar 
regions  and  in  countries  covered  by  deserts,  open  to  the 
burning  rays  of  the  mid-day  sun.  The  color  that  is  most 
grateful  to  the  human  eyes  is  the  blue  of  the  sky,  the 
green  of  the  foliage,  or  the  neutral  tints  of  the  water. 
Now  the  generations  which  have  been  using  our  printed 
literature  are  injuring  the  integrity  of  their  sense  of 
sight.  Black  ink  on  white  paper  is  an  unnatural  combi- 
nation ;  hence  the  use  of  spectacles,  the  prevalence  of 
myopia,  and  other  eye  diseases,  and  the  impaired  sight 
of  all  students. 

Sir  O. — Well,  what  are  you  going  to  do  about  it  ? 
The  printed  literature  of  all  countries  is  in  these  objec- 
tionable colors. 

Mr.  F. — That  is  why  I  am  in  hope  that  the  lithograph 
will  replace  the  black-and-white  printed  page.  I  predict 
that  the  literature  of  the  future  will  be  printed  in  the 
colors  of  nature.  It  will  be  in  greens,  blues,  and  other 
hues  grateful  to  the  human  eye.  If  we  ever  have  a  per- 
manent literature,  it  will  probably  be  a  yellow  ink  on  a 
background  of  dark  blue. 

Sir  O. — That  seems  to  be  a  strange  combination. 
Yet,  now  that  I  think  of  it,  the  color  that  carries  radi- 
ance the  greatest  distance  in  nature  is  the  yellow  star 
backed  by  the  blue  of  the  heavens.  It  is  not  probable 
we  would  see  one  tenth  of  the  stars,  if  their  colors  were 
blue  or  green. 

Mr.  F. — I  have  read  somewhere  of  a  man  who  was 
losing  his  eyesight.  A  certain  portion  of  his  visual 
power  failed  him  day  by  day.     He  tested  the  various 


SOME   ODD   CONCEITS.  1 73 

colors.  The  last  he  could  see  before  his  eyesight  com- 
pletely failed  him  was  yellow.  When  subsequently  he 
recovered  sight  the  first  color  he  could  distinguish  again 
was  yellow.  Sign  painters  instinctively  put  a  gilt  yellow 
letter  on  a  black  background,  as  this  combination  can  be 
distinguished  farther  than  any  other. 

Note. — The  author  of  this  work  published  two  numbers  of  a  mag- 
azine called  The  Modern  Thinker.  One  of  his  objects  was  to 
call  the  attention  of  the  public  to  the  necessity  for  reform  in  our 
black-and-white  printed  literature.  The  Modern  Thinker  was  a 
very  bizarre-looking  publication.  Different  colored  inks  and  paper 
of  different  hues,  some  of  them  very  incongruous,  were  used.  The 
only  colors  not  used  were  black  ink  and  white  paper.  A  fair  sale 
resulted  ;  but  the  author  was  engaged  in  daily  journalism,  and  could 
not  find  time  or  strength  to  continue  the  publication.  The  color 
theory 'on  which  the  magazine  was  printed  at  the  time  attracted  no 
attention. 


A  WORD  WITH  A  CRITIC. 


Sir  Oracle. — My  forecasting  faculty  has  been  busy 
in  thinking  out  what  you  will  say  of  my  book,  Mr.  Critic. 
You  will  probably  point  out  certain  errors  of  fact.  You 
will  notice  that  I  repeat  myself,  that  the  style  is  collo- 
quial, and  at  times  both  inaccurate  and  inelegant.  You 
will  dispute  my  reasoning,  and  you  will  say — probably 
with  some  justice — that  while  I  disavow  having  any 
Utopia,  yet  that  unconsciously  I  have  certain  pet  theories 
about  religion,  morals,  economics,  and  politics,  in  con- 
formity of  which  I  predict  the  future  of  society.  No 
doubt  my  readers  will  profit  by  what  you  gentlemen  will 
set  forth  ;  but,  after  all,  I  question  your  competency, 
Mr.  Critic,  to  say  whether  I  am  right  or  wrong  in  my 
forecasts.  That  must  be  left  for  final  settlement  to  the 
generations  that  follow  us.  I  should  not  be  surprised 
if  what  seems  to  be  my  most  eccentric  notions  should 
turn  out  to  be  correct,  while  the  most  obvious  deductions 
from  well-established  facts  may  prove  to  be  delusions 
and  snares. 

Critic. — Nothing  you  can  now  say  will  prevent  my 
tribe  from  overhauling  your  work  severely.  You  have 
ventured  into  a  new  and  very  difficult  field,  and  we  shall 
take  it  for  granted  that  you  were  not  properly  equipped 
for  your  work.  But  certain  people  rush  in  where  angels 
fear  to  tread,  and  you  are  one  of  them.     You  have  pub- 

i74 


A    WORD  WITH  A    CRITIC.  1 75 

lished  a  book  which  will  be  regarded  as  an  ambitious 
attempt  to  accomplish  the  impossible,  nor  will  you  get 
any  credit  for  your  audacity.  The  mightiest  changes  in 
store  for  us  are  those  which  are  unforeseen.  Aristotle 
could  point  out  the  various  forms  of  government  ;  Plato 
could  dream  of  an  ideal  republic  ;  but  if  a  Grecian  in- 
ventor should  tell  either  of  these  philosophers  that  the 
time  would  come  when  travellers  would  be  transported 
at  the  rate  of  fifty  miles  an  hour  ;  that  the  lightning 
could  be  used  to  transmit  intelligence  so  swiftly  as  prac- 
tically to  get  rid  of  space  and  time  ;  that  men  could  con- 
verse with  each  other  hundreds  of  miles  apart,  he  would 
have  been  regarded  as  a  lunatic.  Man's  mightiest  tri- 
umphs have  so  far  been  over  nature.  The  race  itself,  as 
a  race,  has  made  very  little  progress.  Even  our  culti- 
vated classes  are  not  up  to  the  average,  physically  or 
mentally,  of  the  Grecian  citizen  of  the  age  of  Pericles. 
But  what  marvellous  progress  we  have  made  in  getting 
control  over  the  forces  of  nature  ! 

Sir  O. — What  you  say  is  true  enough,  judged  by  the 
past ;  but  I  venture  to  predict  that  this  same  wonder- 
working science  will  direct  its  attention  in  the  future  to 
the  improvement  of  man  and  his  environment.  Impor- 
tant as  have  been  the  results  from  the  invention  of  gun- 
powder, steam,  and  communication  by  electricity,  these 
are  as  nothing  to  what  will  be  accomplished  when  the 
organized  common-sense  of  the  race  is  brought  to  bear 
to  solve  the  problems  connected  with  man's  life  on  this 
planet.  Of  course,  mechanical  and  other  inventions  will 
affect  the  physical  conditions  of  men  wonderfully,  but 
the  larger  triumphs  of  science  will  be  those  which  will 
add  to  the  life,  health,  beauty,  and  happiness  of  the 
human  race. 


176  GLIMPSES  OF  THE  FUTURE. 

Critic. — Apropos  of  what  you  are  saying  permit  me  to 
direct  your  attention  to  a  paragraph  from  a  recent  article 
published  in  The  Forum  for  September,  1888,  by  Mr. 
James  Parton.     It  is  as  follows  : 

The  destiny  of  man  is  hemmed  in  on  every  side  by  hard  condi- 
tions which  can  be  mitigated,  but  not  materially  changed.  We  can- 
not escape  the  limitations  of  our  lot,  do  what  we  will.  If  we  who 
are  now  alive  could  return  to  life  two  thousand  years  from  the  pres- 
ent time,  we  should  doubtless  remark  with  pleasure  many  changes 
in  the  aspect  of  things  and  some  decided  improvements — perhaps 
fewer  people  and  those  better  provided, — but  we  should  certainly  find 
that  not  one  of  the  essential  facts  of  human  life  had  altered.  Life 
would  still  be  short,  and  nearly  all  of  it  spent  in  the  mere  business 
of  prolonging  itself.  Man  would  still  be  weak  and  prone  to  error. 
The  human  race  would  still  be  poor.  The  lion  would  still  have  the 
lion's  share.  Rude  strength  would  still  push  aside  and  stride  past 
amiable  weakness.  There  would  still  be  in  every  well-disposed 
mind  the  old  conflict  between  duty  and  inclination,  between  reason 
and  prejudice,  between  the  higher  impulse  and  the  lower  propensity. 
Competition  would  still  be  the  mainspring  of  the  activity  of  men. 
Appearances  would  still  deceive,  and  men  would  be  both  guided  and 
misguided  by  their  own  experience.  The  two  thousand  years  be- 
hind them  would  instruct  and  delude  them  as  our  last  two  thousand 
instruct  and  delude  us.  Lies  crushed  to  earth  would  rise  again,  as 
they  do  now.  Error  a  thousand  times  refuted  would  still  prevail. 
Probably  the  world  would  be  as  like  and  as  unlike  its  present  condi- 
tion as  the  age  in  which  we  live  is  like  and  unlike  the  age  when 
Socrates  was  wise  in  Greece  and  Aristophanes  burlesqued  him. 
But  in  that  future  time  June  and  October  will  still  be  enchanting 
months  ;  Christmas  will  come  in  December  ;  the  high  pleasures  will 
still  be  cheap  and  accessible  ;  and  a  person  of  good  sense  will  still 
be  able  to  pick  his  way  through  life  with  some  comfort  and  much 
enjoyment,  besides  adding  a  little  to  the  general  weal. 

Sir  O. — I  wish  I  could  write  as  well  as  Mr.  Parton  ; 
but  I  am  afraid  he  is  becoming  discouraged  in  his  old 
age.     He  started  out  full  of  reformatory  zeal,  but  man's 


A    WORD   WITH  A    CRITIC.  1 77 

life  is  short,  and  our  noblest  ideals  rarely  survive  middle 
age.  I  am  not  afraid  to  assert  that  before  the  expiration 
of  the  two  thousand  years  spoken  of  by  Mr.  Parton 
there  will  be  mighty  changes  on  this  planet  of  ours.  Man 
will  have  penetrated  into  and  utilized  all  its  waste  places. 
The  population  of  the  earth  will  be  very  dense  ;  life  will 
be  prolonged,  and  disease  will  be  scarcely  known.  The 
whole  globe  will  be  under  one  government,  the  labor 
question  will  be  solved  satisfactorily,  and  the  relations  of 
the  sexes  will  be  so  adjusted  as  to  conduce  to  human 
happiness. 

Critic. — So  the  truth  comes  out  at  last !  You  have  a 
Utopia.  You  do  believe  in  a  millennium  !  Still  you  can- 
not deny  that  there  is  many  a  bloody  and  shameful  page 
of  human  history  yet  to  be  written.  Myriads  of  human 
beings  will  live  lives  of  misery.  Is  it  not  true  that  a  sum- 
ming-up of  all  the  horrors  yet  to  be  experienced  by  the 
children  of  men  would  be  so  terrible,  if  it  could  be  real- 
ized, as  to  make  one  feel  like  committing  suicide  to  get 
rid  of  so  hateful  an  existence  ? 

Sir  O. — Nevertheless,  I  believe  most  profoundly  in 
the  final  triumph  of  good  over  evil.  As  yet,  all  is  chaos, 
but  the  duty  of  every  human  being  is  to  help  hasten  the 
day  when  man  and  his  environment  will  be  brought  into 
harmonious  relations  with  each  other. 


THE    END. 


WmmM0mm 


i» 


*$2S^& 


^ 


CTS^*^ 


